....  ,~,Jmv 

0mm 


A^« 


at.P'' 


SEP   IE    1;.J 


>J 


■L      <^--    ^-''' 


85  1555 
B2bl 


NOTES.   \<^^^^ 

CKITICAL,  ILLUSTRATIVE,  AND  PRACTICAL, 


BOOK   or   DANIEL, 


INTRODUCTORY   DISSERTATION. 


BY      ' 

ALBERT    BARN    ES. 


NEW- YORK  : 

LEAVITT    &    ALLEN 

1861. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  j'ear  1S53,  by 

ALBERT    BARNES. 

In  the  Office  of  tlie  Clerk  of  the  District  Court  of  the  Eastern  District  of 

Pennsylvaniii. 


Stereotj'ped  by  Slote  &  Mooney,  Philadelphia. 


F  II  E  F  A  C  E 


A  VERY  remarkable  resemblance  has  always  been  observed 
between  the  Book  of  Daniel  and  the  Book  of  Revelation. 
Whatever  view  may  be  taken  of  the  proper  interpretation 
of  these  books,  it  is  difficult  to  write  a  commentary  on  one  of 
them  without  carefully  studying  the  other,  and  without  practi- 
cally furnishing  to  a  considerable  extent  an  exposition  of  the 
other.  There  is  no  evidence,  indeed,  that  John,  in  the  Book 
of  Revelation,  intended  to  imitate  Daniel,  and  yet  there  is  so 
strong  a  resemblance  in  the  manner  in  which  the  Divine  dis- 
closures respecting  the  future  were  made  to  the  two  writers; 
there  is  so  clear  a  reference  to  the  same  great  events  in  the 
history  of  the  world ;  there  is  so  much  similarity  in  the  symbols 
employed,  that  no  commentator  can  well  write  on  the  one 
without  discussing  many  points,  and  making  use  of  many 
illustrations,  which  would  be  equally  appropriate  in  an  expo- 
sition of  the  other. 

The  following  Notes  on  the  Book  of  Daniel  were  mostly 
written  before  I  commenced  the  preparation  of  Notes  on  the 
Book  of  Revelation,  though  the  latter  volume  is  published 
first.     It  has  thus  happened  that  many  inquiries  have  been 

( "I ) 


rV  PREFACE. 

.started,  and  many  subjects  discussed,  in  connection  with  thia 
book,  which  would  otherwise  have  found  a  place  in  the  Notes  on 
the  Book  of  Revelation,  and  that  in  the  exposition  of  the  latter, 
I  have,  in  many  places,  to  avoid  needless  repetition,  done  little 
more  than  refer  to  corresponding  places  in  the  Notes  on  Daniel. 
While  I  have  endeavoured  to  make  each  work  a  complete 
exposition  in  itself,  it  is  nevertheless  true  that  the  two  volumes 
are  designed,  in  some  measure,  to  go  together,  and  that  the 
one  is  necessary  to  the  full  understanding  of  the  other. 
Philadelphia,  Dec.  26th,  1851. 


INTRODUCTION 


so 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


§  1.  THE   LIFE   OF   DANIEL. 


Of  Daniel  little  more  is  known,  or  can  now  be  ascertained,  than  is  re- 
corded in  this  book.  There  are  two  other  persons  of  this  name  mentioned 
in  the  Bible — a  son  of  David,  1  Chron.  iii.  1  ;  and  a  Levite  of  the  race  of 
Ithamar,  Ezra  viii.  2 ;  Neh.  s.  6.  The  latter  has  been  sometimes  con- 
founded with  the  prophet,  as  he  is  in  the  Apocryphal  Addenda  to  the 
Septuagint. 

Daniel,  supposed  commonly  to  be  the  same  person  as  the  author  of 
this  book,  is  twice  mentioned  by  Ezekiel,  once  as  deserving  to  be  ranked 
with  Noah  and  Job,  and  once  as  eminent  for  wisdom.  "  Though  these 
three  men,  Noah,  Daniel,  and  Job  were  in  it,  they  should  deliver  but  their 
own  souls  by  their  righteousness,  saith  the  Lord  God."  Ezek.  xiv.  14. 
"Behold,  thou  art  wiser  than  Daniel,  and  there  is  no  secret  that  they 
can  hide  from  thee."  Ezek.  xxviii.  3.  Whether  this  is  the  Daniel  who  is 
tlae  author  of  this  book,  however,  or  whether  this  was  some  ancient 
patriarch  whose  name  had  been  handed  down  by  tradition,  and  whose 
name  was  assumed  by  the  author  of  this  book  in  later  times,  has  been  a 
question  among  recent  critics,  and  will  properly  come  up  for  examina- 
'jn  under  the  next  section  in  this  Introduction. 

Assuming  now  that  the  book  is  genuine,  and  that  it  was  written  by 
him  whose  name  it  bears,  all  that  is  known  of  Daniel  is  substantially  as 
follows : — 

He  was  descended  from  one  of  the  highest  families  in  Judah,  if  not  one 
of  roj'al  blood  (Notes  on  ch.  i.  3  ;  Josephus'  Ant.  b.  x.  ch.  x.  §  1.)  His 
birth-place  was  probably  Jerusalem,  (comp.  ch.  ix.  24,)  though  it  is  not 
absolutely  certain  that  this  passage  would  demonstrate  this. 

Of  his  first  years  nothing  is  recorded.  At  an  early  age  we  find  him  in 
Babylon,  among  the  captive  HebrcAvs  whom  Nebuchadnezzar  had  carried 
away  at  the  first  deportation  of  the  people  of  Judah,  in  the  fourth  year 
of  Jehoiakim.  He  is  mentioned  in  connection  with  three  other  youths, 
apparently  of  the  same  rank,  Ilanpniah,  Mishael,  and  Azariah,  who, 
I*  (v) 


VI  INTRODUCTION. 

with  him,  Tvere  selected  for  the  purpose  of  being  instructed  in  the  lan- 
guage and  literature  of  the  Chaldeans,  with  a  vi«w  to  their  being  employed 
in  the  service  of  the  court.  Dan.  i.  3,  4.  Ilis  age  at  that  time  it  i3 
impossible  to  determine  with  accuracy,  but  it  is  not  improbable  that 
it  was  somewhere  about  twelve  or  fifteen  years.  In  ch.  i.  4.  he  and 
his  three  friends  are  called  "children,"  (anSi.).  "This  word  properly 
denotes  the  period  from  the  age  of  childhood  up  to  manhood,  and  might 
be  translated  hoys,  lads,  or  youili." — Professor  Stuart  on  Daniel,  p.  373. 
Ignatius  (Ep.  ad  Magn.),  says  that  Daniel  was  twelve  years  of  age  when 
he  went  into  exile  ;  Chrysostome  says  that  he  was  eighteen,  (0pp.  vi. 
p.  423  ;)  Epiphanius  says,  tn  vnmoi  lov,  Jei-ome  calls  him  admodum puer. 
These  are,  of  course,  mere  conjectures,  or  traditions,  but  they  are  proba- 
bly not  far  from  the  truth.  Such  was  the  age  at  which  persons  would  be 
most  likely  to  be  selected  for  the  training  here  referre  li  to.  The  design 
of  this  selection  and  training  is  not  mentioned,  but  in  the  circumstances 
of  the  case  it  is  perhaps  not  difficult  to  conjecture  it.  The  Hebrews  wer< 
a  captive  people.  It  was  natural  to  suppose  that  they  would  be  restless^ 
and  perhaps  insubordinate,  in  their  condition,  and  it  was  a  matter  of 
policy  to  do  all  that  could  be  done  to  conciliate  them.  Nothing  would 
better  tend  to  this  than  to  select  some  of  their  own  number  who  were  of 
their  most  distinguished  families  ;  to  place  them  at  court ;  to  provide  for 
them  from  tho  royal  bounty ;  to  give  them  the  advantages  of  the  best 
education  that  the  capital  afforded ;  to  make  an  arrangement  that  con- 
templated their  future  employment  in  the  service  of  the  state,  and  to 
furnish  them  every  opportunity  of  promotion.  Besides,  in  the  inter- 
course of  the  government  with  the  captive  Hebrews,  of  which,  from  the 
nature  of  the  case,  there  W'Ould  be  frequent  occasion,  it  would  be  an  ad- 
vantage to  have  native  born  Hebrews  in  the  confidence  of  the  govern- 
ment, who  could  be  employed  to  conduct  that  intercourse. 

In  this  situation,  and  with  this  view,  Daniel  received  that  thorough 
education  which  Oriental  etiquette  makes  indispensable  in  a  courtier, 
(Comp.  Plato,  Alcib.  I  37,)  and  was  more  especially  instructed  in  the 
science  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  in  speaking  and  writing  their  language. 
He  had  before  evidently  been  carefully  trained  in  the  Hebrew  learning, 
and  in  the  knowledge  of  the  institutions  of  his  country,  and  was 
thoroughly  imbued  with  the  principles  of  the  religion  of  his  fathers. 
An  opportunity  soon  occurred  of  putting  his  principles  to  the  test. 
Trained  in  strict  religious  principles,  and  in  the  sternest  rules  of  tem- 

f)erance  in  eating  and  drinking,  and  fearing  the  effect  of  the  luxurious 
iving  provided  for  him  and  his  companions  by  the  royal  bounty,  he 
resolved,  with  them,  to  avoid  at  once  the  danger  of  conforming  to  the 
habits  of  idolaters  ;  of  "  polluting"  himself  by  customs  forbidden  by  his 
religion,  and  of  jeoparding  his  own  health  and  life  by  intemperate  in- 
dulgence. He  aimed,  also,  to  secure  the  utmost  vigor  of  body,  and  the 
utmost  clearness  of  mind,  by  a  course  of  strict  and  conscientious  temper- 
ance. He  obtained  permission,  therefore,  to  abstain  from  the  food  pro- 
vided for  him,  and  to  make  an  experiment  of  the  most  temperate  mode 
of  living,  ch.  i.  8 — 14.  "  His  prudent  proceedings,  wise  bearing,  and 
absolute  refusal  to  comply  with  such  customs,  were  crowned  with  the 
divine  blessing,  and  had  the  most  splendid  results." 

After  the  lapse  of  three  years  spent  in  this  course  of  discipline,  Daniel 


INTRODUCTION.  VII 

cassed  the  examination  which  was  necessary  to  admit  him  to  the  royal 
ftivor,  and  was  received  into  connection  with  the  government,  to  be  em- 
ployed in  the  purposes  which  had  been  contemplated  in  this  preparatory 
trainino',  ch.  i.  18 — 20.  One  of  his  first  acts  was  an  interpretation  of  a 
dream  of  Nebuchadnezzar  which  none  of  the  Chaldeans  had  been  able  to 
interpret,  the  result  of  which  was  that  he  was  raised  at  once  to  that  im- 
portant office,  the  governorship  of  the  province  of  Babylon,  and  the  head- 
inspectorship  of  the  sacerdotal  caste,  ch.  ii. 

Considerably  later  in  the  reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  we  find  Daniel  in- 
terpreting another  dream  of  his,  to  the  effect  that,  in  consequence 
of  his  pride,  he  would  be  deprived  for  a  time  of  his  reason  and  hia 
throne,  and  would  be  suffered  to  wander  from  the  abodes  of  men,  and  to 
live  among  wild  beasts,  but  that  after  a  time  he  would  be  again 
restored.  The  record  which  we  have  of  this,  is  found  in  a  proclama- 
tion of  the  king  himself,  which  is  preserved  by  Daniel,  ch.  iv.  In 
the  interpretation  of  this  remarkable  dream,  and  in  stating  to  the 
king — the  most  proud  and  absolute  monarch  of  the  earth  at  that  time — 
what  would  come  upon  him,  Daniel  displays  the  most  touching  anxiety, 
love,  and  loyalty,  for  the  prince,  and  shows  that  he  was  led  to  this  inter- 
pretation only  by  the  conviction  of  the  truth.  In  view  of  a  calamity  so 
great,  he  exhorted  the  monarch  yet  to  humble  himself  and  to  repent  of  his 
sins,  and  to  perform  acts  of  charity,  with  the  hope  that  God  might  be  mer- 
ciful and  avert  from  him  a  doom  so  humiliating — so  much  to  be  dreaded, 
ch.  iv.  19—27. 

Under  the  immediate  successor  of  Nebudchadnezzar — Evil-Merodach — 
Daniel  appears  to  have  been  forgotten,  and  his  talents  and  his  for- 
mer services  seem  to  have  passed  away  from  the  recollection  of  those 
in  power.  His  situation  at  court  appears  to  have  been  confined  to 
an  inferior  office  (ch.  viii,  27),  and  it  would  seem  also  that  this  led 
him  occasionally,  if  not  regularly,  away  from  Babylon  to  some  of 
the  provinces  to  attend  to  business  there.  Comp.  Notes  in  ch.  viii.  2. 
This  was  not  strange.  On  the  death  of  a  monarch,  it  was  not  unu- 
sual to  discharge  the  officers  who  had  been  employed  in  the  govern- 
ment, as,  at  the  present  time,  on  the  death  of  a  king,  or  a  change  of 
dynasty,  the  members  of  the  cabinet  are  changed  ;  or  as  the  same  thing 
happens  in  our  own  country  when  a  change  occurs  in  the  Chief  Magistracy 
of  tlie  nation.*  Sir  John  Chardin  in  his  MS.  Notes  on  Persia  says  that, 
in  his  time,  on  the  death  of  a  Shah  or  king,  all  the  soothsayers  and 
physicians  attached  to  the  court  were  at  once  dismissed  from  oflice  ;  the 
former  because  they  did  not  j^redict  his  death,  and  the  latter  because  they 
did  not  prevent  it.  It  is  to  be  remembered  also,  that  Daniel  was  raised 
to  power  by  the  will  of  Nebuchadnezzar  alone,  and  that  the  offices  which 
he  held  were,  in  part,  in  consequence  of  the  service  which  he  had  ren- 
dered that  prince;  and  it  is  not  strange,  therefore,  that  on  a  change  of 
the  government,  he,  with  perhaps  the  other  favorites  of  the  former 
sovereign,  should  be  suffered  tc  retire.  We  find  consequently  no  men- 
tion made  of  Daniel  during  the  reign  of  Evil-Merodach  or  in  the  short 

*  Since  this  was  written,  a  remarkable  illustration  of  what  is  here  said  has  occurred  in  our 
own  country,  on  the  death  of  the  late  President,  Gen.  Zachary  Taylor.  It  will  be  recollected 
that  on  the  Tery  night  of  his  death,  all  the  members  of  the  cabinet  tendered  their  resignation 
to  his  constitutional  successor,  and  all  of  them  io  fact  ceased  to  hold  office  and  retired  to  pri- 
"ttta  life. 


Vm  INTRODUCTION. 

reign  of  his  successor ;  yre  lose  sight  of  him  until  the  reign  of  Belshazzafj 
the  last  king  of  Babylon,  and  then  he  is  mentioned  only  in  connection 
with  the  closing  scene  of  his  life,  ch.  v.  In  consequence  of  a  remarkable 
vision  ■n-hich  Belshazzar  had  of  a  hand-writing  on  the  wall,  and  of  the 
inability  of  any  of  the  wise  men  of  the  Chaldeans  to  read  and  interpret 
it,  Daniel,  at  the  instance  of  the  queen  mother,  who  remembered  hia 
former  services  at  court,  was  called  in,  and  read  the  writing,  and  an- 
nounced to  the  king  the  impending  destiny  of  himself  and  his  empire. 
For  this  service  he  was  again  restored  to  honor,  and  the  purpose  was 
formed  to  raise  him  to  an  exalted  rank  at  court — a  purpose  which  was, 
however,  frustrated  by  the  fact  that  Babylon  was  that  very  night  taken, 
and  that  the  government  passed  into  the  hands  of  the  Medes  and  Per- 
sians. It  was  under  this  king,  however,  that  Daniel  had  two  of  his  most 
remarkable  visions  (ch.  vii.  viii.),  respecting  future  events — visions  which 
perhaps  more  definitely  than  any  other  in  the  Scriptures,  disclose  what 
IS  to  occur  in  the  ages  to  come. 

After  the  conquest  of  Babylon  by  the  united  arms  of  the  Medes  and 
Persians,  under  the  reign  of  Darius  or  Cyaxares,  Daniel  was  raised  again 
to  an  exalted  station.  The  whole  kingdom  was  divided  into  one  hundred 
and  twenty  provinces,  and  over  these  three  presidents  or  chief  governors 
were  appointed,  and  of  these  Daniel  had  the  first  rank,  ch.  vi.  1 — 3.  The 
reasons  of  this  appointment  are  not  stated,  but  they  were  doubtless 
found  in  such  circumstances  as  the  following: — that  it  was  desirable 
for  Darius  to  employ  some  one  who  Avas  familiar  with  the  afi'airs 
of  the  Babylonian  empire  ;  that  Daniel  probably  had  knowledge  on 
that  subject  equal  or  superior  to  any  other  one  that  could  be  found ; 
that  he  had  long  been  employed  at  court,  and  was  familiar  with  the  laws, 
usages  and  customs  that  prevailed  there  ;  that  he  knew  better  than  any 
one  else  pei-haps  what  would  secure  the  tranquillity  of  that  portion  of 
the  empire  ;  that,  being  himself  a  foreigner,  it  might  be  supposed  better 
to  employ  him  than  it  would  be  a  native  Chaldean,  for  it  might  be  pre- 
sumed that  he  would  be  less  inimical  to  a  foreign  dominion.  Under 
these  circumstances  ho  was  again  raised  to  a  high  rank  among  the 
officers  of  the  government ;  but  his  elevation  was  not  beheld  without 
malice  and  envy.  Those  who  might  have  expected  this  office  for 
themselves,  or  who  were  dissatisfied  that  a  foreigner  should  be  thus  ex- 
alted, resolved,  if  possible,  to  bring  him  into  such  a  situation  as  would 
ruin  him,  ch.  vi.  4.  To  do  this,  they  determined  to  take  advantage  of  a 
principle  in  the  government  of  the  Medes  and  Persians,  that  a  law 
having  once  received  the  royal  sanction  could  not  be  changed,  and  by 
securing  the  passage  of  such  a  law  as  they  knew  Daniel  would  not  obey, 
they  hoped  to  humble  and  ruin  him.  They,  therefore,  under  plausible 
pretences,  secured  the  passage  of  a  law  that  no  one  in  the  realm  should 
be  allowed  for  a  certain  time  to  offer  any  petition  to  any  God  or  man, 
except  the  king,  on  penalty  of  being  thrown  into  a  den  of  lions.  Daniel, 
as  they  anticipated,  was  the  first  to  disregard  this  law,  by  continuing  his 
regular  habit  of  worshipping  God,  praying,  as  he  had  been  accustomed, 
three  times  a  day,  with  his  window  open.  The  consequence  was,  that 
the  king,  there  being  no  way  to  prevent  the  execution  of  the  law,  allowed 
it  to  be  executed.  Daniel  was  east  into  the  den  of  lions,  but  was  mi 
raculously  preserved ;  and  this  new  proof  of  his  integrity,  and  of  the  divine 


INTRODUCTION.  IX 

favour,  was  the  means  of  his  being  raised  to  more  "exalted  honour, 
ch.  vi. 

In  this  situation  at  court,  and  with  these  advantages  for  promoting  the 
interests  of  his  people,  he  employed  himself  in  seriously  and  diligently 
securing  the  return  of  the  exiles  to  their  own  country,  though  it  does  not 
appear  that  he  himself  returned,  or  that  he  contemplated  a  return.  It  is 
probable  that  he  supposed  that  at  his  time  of  life  it  would  not  be  wise  to 
attempt  such  a  journey ;  or  that  he  supposed  he  could  be  of  moro  use 
to  his  countrymen  in  Babylon  in  favouring  their  return  than  he  could  by 
accompanying  them  to  their  own  land.  His  position  at  the  court  of  the 
Medo-Persian  government  gave  him  an  opportunity  of  rendering  material 
aid  to  his  people,  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  it  was  through  his  instru- 
mentality that  the  decree  was  obtained  from  Cyrus  which  alloAved  them 
to  return.  One  of  the  designs  of  Providence  in  raising  him  up,  was, 
doubtless,  that  he  might  exert  that  influence  at  court,  and  that  he  might 
thus  be  the  means  of  restoring  the  exiles.  He  had  at  last  the  happiness 
to  see  his  most  ardent  wishes  accomplished  in  this  respect. 

In  the  third  year  of  Cyrus,  he  had  a  vision,  or  a  series  of  visions,  (chs.  x. 
xi.  xii.)  containing  minute  details  respecting  the  history  and  sufferings 
of  his  nation  to  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  concluding  with  a 
more  general  represention  (ch.  xii.)  of  what  would  occur  in  the  last  daya 
of  the  world's  history. 

Bej'ond  this,  nothing  certain  is  known  of  Daniel.  The  accounts 
respecting  him  are  v.ague,  confused,  and  strange.  How  long  he  lived, 
and  when  and  where  he  died,  are  points  on  which  no  certain  information 
can  now  be  obtained.  Josephus  gives  no  account  of  his  latter  days,  or  of 
his  death,  though  he  says  respecting  him,  "  he  was  so  happy  as  to  have 
strange  revelations  made  to  him,  and  these  as  to  one  of  the  greatest  of 
the  prophets,  insomuch  that  while  he  was  alive  he  had  the  esteem  and 
applause  both  of  kings  and  of  the  multitude ;  and  now  he  is  dead  he 
retains  a  remembrance  that  Avill  never  fail."  Ant.  b.  x.  ch.  xi.  It  is 
commonly  believed  that  he  died  in  Chaldea,  having  been  detained  there 
by  his  employments  in  the  Persian  empire.  Epiphanius  says  that  he 
died  in  Babylon,  and  this  has  been  the  commonly  received  opinion  of 
historians.  This  opinion,  however,  has  not  been  universal.  Some  sup- 
pose that  he  died^t  Shusan  or  Susa.  Josephus  (Ant.  b.  x.  ch.  xi.)  says 
that,  "  on  account  of  the  opinion  which  men  had  that  he  was  beloved  of 
God,  he  built  a  tower  at  Ecbatana  in  Media,  which  was  a  most  elegant 
building,  and  wonderfully  made,"  and  that  it  was  still  remaining  in  his 
day.  Benjamin  of  Tudela  says  that  his  monument  was  shown  at  Chuzestan 
which  is  the  ancient  Susa.  As  Benjamin  of  Tudela  professes  to  record 
what  he  saw  and  heard,  and  as  his  '  Itinerary'  h  a  book  which  has  beea 
more  frequently  transcribed  and  translated  thun  almost  any  other  book 
except  the  Travels  of  Maundeville,  it  may  be  of  some  interest  to  copj 
what  he  has  said  of  the  tomb  of  Daniel.  It  is  a  record  of  the  traditions 
of  the  East — the  country  where  Daniel  lived  and  died,  and  it  is  not 
improbably  founded  in  essential  truth.  At  any  rate,  it  will  show  what 
has  been  the  current  tradition  in  the  East  respecting  Daniel,  and  is  all 
that  can  now  be  known  respecting  the  place  of  his  death  and  burial. 
Benjamin  of  Tudela  was  a  Jewish  Rabbi  of  Spain,  who  travelled  through 
Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa,  from  Spain  to  China,  between  A.  D.  1160  and 


X  INTRODUCTION. 

1173.  His  Itirlerary  yras  first  printed  in  1543.  It  was  a  work  in  wide 
circulation  in  the  13th,  14th,  and  15th  centuries,  and  has  been  translated 
from  the  original  Hebrew,  into  Latin,  English,  French,  Dutch,  and  Jewish 
German,  and,  in  these  languages  has  passed  through  not  less  than  twenty- 
iwo  editions.  I  quote  from  the  London  and  Berlin  edition  of  1840. 
*'  Four  miles  from  henvje  begins  Khuzoetan,  Elam  of  Scripture,  a  large 
province  which,  however,  as  but  partially  inhabited,  a  portion  of  it  lying 
in  ruins.  Among  the  latter  are  the  remains  of  Shushan  the  Metropolis 
and  palace  of  king  Achashverosh,  which  still  contains  very  large  and 
handsome  buildings  of  ancient  date.  Its  seven  thousand  Jewish  inhabi 
tants  possess  fourteen  synagogues ;  in  front  of  one  of  which  is  the  tomb 
of  Daniel,  who  rests  in  peace.  The  river  Ulai  divides  the  parts  of  the  city 
which  are  connected  with  a  bridge ;  that  portion  of  it  which  is  inhabited 
by  the  Jews,  contains  the  markets  ;  to  it  all  trade  is  confined,  and  there 
dwell  all  the  rich  ;  on  the  other  side  of  the  river  they  are  poor,  because 
they  are  deprived  of  the  abovenamed  advantages,  and  have  even  no 
gardens  nor  orchards.  These  circumstances  gave  rise  to  jealousy,  which 
was  fostered  by  the  belief  that  all  honor  and  riches  originated  from  the 
possession  of  the  remains  of  the  prophet  Daniel,  who  rests  in  peace,  and 
who  was  buried  on  their  side.  A  request  was  made  hij  iJte  poor  for  per- 
mission to  remove  the  sepulchre  to  the  other  side,  but  it  was  rejected ; 
upon  which  a  war  arose  and  was  carried  on  between  the  two  parties  for 
a  length  of  time ;  this  strife  lasted  until  '  their  souls  became  loath' 
(Num.  xxi.  4.  5  ;  Judg.  svi.  IC),  and  they  came  to  a  mutual  agreement, 
by  which  it  was  stipulated  that  the  coffin,  which  contained  Daniel's  bones, 
should  be  deposited  alternately  every  year  on  either  side.  Both  parties 
faithfully  adhered  to  this  arrangement,  which  was,  however,  interrupted 
by  the  interference  of  Sanjar  Shah  Ben  Shah,  who  governs  all  Persia,  and 
holds  supreme  power  over  forty-five  of  its  kings. 

"  When  this  great  emperor  Sanjar,  king  of  Persia,  came  to  Shushan, 
and  saw  that  the  coffin  of  Daniel  was  removed  from  side  to  side,  he 
crossed  the  bridge  with  a  very  numerous  retinue,  and  accompanied  by 
Jews  and  Mahometans,  inquired  into  the  nature  of  these  proceedings. 
Upon  being  told  what  we  have  related  above,  he  declared  that  it  was 
derogatory  to  the  honor  of  Daniel,  and  recommended  that  the  distance 
between  the  two  banks  should  be  exactly  measured,  that  Daniel's  cofBn 
should  be  deposited  in  another  coffin,  made  of  glass,  and  that  it  should 
be  suspended  from  the  very  middle  of  the  bridge,  fastened  by  chains  of 
iron.  A  place  of  public  worship  was  erected  on  the  very  spot,  open  to 
every  one  who  desired  to  say  his  prayers,  whether  he  be  Jew  or  Gentile, 
and  the  coffin  of  Daniel  is  suspended  from  the  bridge  unto  this  very  day." 
Vol.  i.  pp.  117—120.  _  _  _  _       . 

This  story,  trifling  as  it  is  in  some  of  its  details,  may  be  admitted  as 
evidence  of  a  tradition  in  the  East  that  Daniel  died  and  was  buried  at 
Shushan.  This  tradition,  moreover,  is  very  ancient.  In  a  Note  on  this 
passage  (vol.  ii.  p.  152.)  A.  Asher,  the  publisher  of  the  Itinerary  of  Ben- 
jamin says,  "  Aasini  of  Cufah,  a  venerable  historian,  who  preceded  Ibn 
Hankel  by  two  hundred  years,  (for  he  died  735)  mentions  the  discovery  of 
Daniel's  coffin  at  Sus.  Ibn  Hankel,  who  travelled  in  the  tenth  century, 
epeaks  of  it,  and  ascribes  to  the  possession  of  the  bones  of  Daniel  the  virtue 
«f  dispelling  all  sorts  of  distress,  particularly  that  of  famine  from  want  of 


INTRODUCTION.  XI 

rain/'  It  has  been  a  matter  of  much  controversy  whether  the  place 
now  known  as  Chouck,  Chouz,  or  Sous  is  the  ancient  Sliushan,  (Lat. 
31°  55',  Lons.  83=  40'),  or  the  place  now  called  Shuster  (Lat.  31° 
30',  Lonju.  8-4°  30').  The  former  opinion  is  maintained  by  llennel, 
Ouselcy,  Bai-bie  du  Bocage,  Kinneir,  and  Iloek  ;  the  latter  by  d'llerbelot 
d'Anville,  Vincent,  Mannert,  and  Hammer.  Major  Rawlinson,  who  has 
furnished  the  most  recent  account  of  this  place,  maintains  that  '  Shushan 
the  palace'  is  the  present  Susan  on  the  Kulan  or  Eulacus,  the  Ulai 
of  Scripture.  See  vol.  ix.  of  the  Journal  of  the  Royal  Geographical 
Society. 

g  2.  GENUINENESS  AND  AUTHENTICITY   OF   THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL. 
Consideration  of  Objections. 

Until  a  comparatively  recent  period,  with  some  slight  exceptions, 
the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  have  been 
regarded  as  settled,  and  its  canonical  authority  was  as  little  doubted 
as  that  of  any  other  portion  of  the  Bible.  The  ancient  Hebrews 
never  called  its  genuineness  or  authenticity  in  question  (Lengerke, 
Das  Buch  Daniel,  Konigsberg,  1835,  p.  G;  Ilengstenberg,  Die  Authentie 
des  Daniel,  Berlin,  1831.  p.  1).  It  is  true  that  in  the  Talmud  (Tract.  Baba 
Bathra,  Fol.  15.  Ed.  A^enet.)  it  is  said  that  "the  men  of  the  Great  Synogogue 
wrote — 13P3  the  .ijip  K.  D.  N.  G. — that  is,  portions  (xi.  chs.)  of  the 
Book  of  Ezekiel,  the  prophet  Daniel,  and  the  Book  of  Esther  ;"  but  this, 
as  Lengerke  has  remarked,  (p.  v.)  does  not  mean  that  they  had  introduced 
this  book  into  the  canon,  as  Bertholdt  supposes,  but  that,  partly  by 
tradition,  and  partly  by  inspiration,  they  revised  it  anew.  But  whatever 
may  be  the  truth  in  regard  to  this,  it  does  not  prove  that  the  ancient 
Jews  did  not  consider  it  canonical.  It  is  true  that  much  has  been  said 
about  the  fact  that  the  Jews  did  not  class  this  book  among  the  prophets, 
but  placed  it  in  the  Hagiography,  or  Kethubim,  D''3in^.  It  has  been  in- 
ferred from  this,  that  they  believed  that  it  was  composed  a  considerable 
time  after  the  other  prophetic  books,  and  that  they  did  not  deem  it 
worthy  of  a  place  among  their  prophetic  books  in  general.  But,  even  if 
this  were  so,  it  Avould  not  prove  that  they  did  not  regard  it  as  a  genuine 
production  of  Daniel  ;  and  the  fiict  that  it  was  not  placed  among  the 
prophetic  books  may  be  accounted  for  without  the  supposition  that  they 
did  not  regard  it  as  genuine.  The  usual  statement  on  that  subject  is, 
that  they  placed  the  book  there  because  they  say  that  Daniel  lived  the 
life  of  a  courtier  in  Babylon,  rather  than  the  life  of  a  prophet ;  and  the 
Jews  further  assert  that,  though  he  received  divine  communications,  they 
were  only  by  dreams  and  visions  of  the  night,  whicli  they  regard  as  the 
most  imperfect  kind  of  revelations.  Home,  Intro,  iv.  188.  The  place  which 
Daniel  should  occupy  in  the  sacred  writings  probably  became  a  matter 
of  discussion  among  the  Hebrews  only  after  the  coming  of  the  Saviour, 
when  Christians  urged  so  zealously  his  plain  prophecies  (ch.  ix.  24 — 27) 
in  proof  of  the  Messiahship  of  the  Lord  Jesus. 

The  first  open  and  avowed  adversary  to  the  genuineness  and  authen- 
ticity of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  was  Porphyry,  a  learned  adversary  of  the 
Christian  faith  in  the  third  century.  He  wrote  fifteen  books  against 
Christianity,  <l\  of  which  arc  lost,  except  some  fragments  preserved  by 


Xn  INTRODUCTION. 

Euseblus,  Jerome,  and  others.  His  objections  against  Daniel  "were  niada 
in  his  twelfth  book,  and  all  that  we  have  of  these  objections  has  been 
preserved  by  Jerome  in  his  commentary  on  the  Book  of  Daniel.  A  full 
account  of  Porphyry,  and  of  his  objections  against  the  Christians  and 
the  sacred  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  so  far  as  can  now  bo 
known,  may  be  seen  in  Lardner,  Jewish  and  Heathen  Testimonies,  vol, 
vii.  pp.  390 — 470,  of  his  works,  Ed.  London,  1829.  In  regard  to  the 
Book  of  Daniel,  he  maintained,  according  to  Jerome  (Pr.  and  Explan.  in 
Daniel),  "  that  the  book  was  not  written  by  him  whose  name  it  bears,  but 
by  another  who  lived  in  Judea  in  the  time  of  Antiochus,  surnamed 
Epiphancs  ;  and  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  does  not  foretell  things  to  come, 
but  relates  what  had  already  happened.  In  a  word,  whatever  it  contains 
to  the  time  of  Antiochus  is  true  history  ;  if  there  is  anything  relating  to 
aftertimes  it  is  folsehood  ;  forasmuch  as  the  writer  could  not  see  things 
future,  but  at  the  most  only  could  make  some  conjectures  about  them. 
To  him  several  of  our  authors  have  given  answers  of  great  labour  and 
diligence,  in  particular  Eusebius,  bishop  of  Csesarea,  in  three  volumes, 
thelSth,  the  19th,  and  the  20th.  ApoUinarius,  also,  in  one  large  book, 
that  is  the  2Gth,  and  before  them,  in  part,  Methodius.  As  it  is  not  my 
design,"  says  Jerome,  "to  confute  the  objections  of  the  adversary,  which 
would  require  a  long  discourse,  but  only  to  explain  the  prophet  to  our 
own  people,  that  is.  Christians,  I  shall  just  observe  that  none  of  the 
prophets  have  spoken  so  clearly  of  Christ  as  Daniel,  for  he  not  only  fore- 
tels  his  coming,  as  do  others  likewise,  but  he  also  teaches  the  time  when 
he  will  come,  and  mentions  in  order  the  princes  of  the  intermediate  space, 
and  the  number  of  the  years,  and  the  signs  of  his  appearance.  And  be- 
cause Porphyry  saw  all  these  things  to  have  been  fulfilled,  and  could  not 
deny  that  they  had  actually  come  to  pass,  he  was  compelled  to  say  as  he 
did  ;  and  because  of  some  similitude  of  circumstances,  he  asserted 
that  the  things  foretold  as  to  be  fulfilled  in  Antichrist  at  the  end  of 
the  world,  happened  in  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  Which 
kind  of  opposition  is  a  testimony  of  truth  ;  for  such  is  the  plain  interpre- 
tation of  the  words,  that  to  incredulous  men  the  prophet  seems  not  to 
foretell  things  to  come,  but  to  relate  things  already  past.  And  though, 
as  before  said,  it  is  not  my  intention  to  confute  all  his  objections,  I 
shall,  as  occasion  offers,  take  notice  of  some  of  his  weak  arguments.  And 
it  may  be  proper  for  us,  among  other  things,  to  observe  now,  that  Por- 
phyry argued  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  was  not  genuine,  because  it  was 
written  in  Greek,  and,  therefore,  was  not  the  work  of  any  Jew,  but  the 
forgery  of  some  Greek  writer.  This  he  argued  from  some  Greek  words 
which  are  in  the  fixble  of  Susanna,  to  which  both  Eusebius  and  ApoUinarius 
returned  the  same  answer,  that  the  fabulous  stories  of  Susanna,  and  Bel, 
and  the  Dragon,  are  not  in  the  Hebrew,  but  are  said  to  have  ])ecn  com- 
posed Ijy  a  person  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  ;  whereas  the  sacred  Scriptures 
assure  us  that  Daniel  and  the  three  children,  his  companions,  were  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah.  And  they  said  they  were  not  accountable  for  what  was  not 
received  by  the  Jews,  nor  was  a  part  of  the  sacred  Scriptui-es."  A  few 
of  the  objections  which  Porpliyry  makes  to  the  credibility  of  certain  parts 
of  Daniel,  Jerome  has  quoted  in  his  commentary  on  the  particular  pas- 
sages referred  to.  These  have  been  collected  by  Dr.  Lardner,  and  may 
be  8oen  in  his  works,  vol.  vii.  pp.  402 — 415.   It  is  not  necessary  to  trans- 


INTRODUCTION.  XIII 

cribe  them  here,  as  they  ■will  come  up  for  consideration  in  the  Notes  on 
the  particular  chapters. 

Dr.  Lardner  [vol.  vii.  p.  401],  remarks  re.'specting  Porphyry,  "that 
Porphyry's  work  against  the  Christians  was  much  laboured,  and  that  in 
this  argument  he  displayed  all  his  learning,  which  was  very  considerable. 
Hence,  we  can  perceive  the  difficulty  of  undertaking  an  answer  to  him, 
for  which  vei'y  few  were  fully  qualitied  ;  in  which  nbne  of  the  apologists 
for  Christianity  seem  to  have  answered  expectations."  "We  cannot  now 
form  a  correct  opinion  of  the  argument  of  Porphyry,  for  we  have  only 
th<3  few  fragments  of  his  work,  which  Jerome  and  others  have  seen  proper 
to  preserve.  We  are  in  danger,  therefore,  of  doing  injustice  to  what  may 
have  been  the  real  force  of  his  argum^ent,  for  it  maij  have  been  stronger 
than  would  be  indicated  by  those  fragments  that  remain.  It  is  impossi- 
ble to  recover  his  main  objections  ;  and  all  that  can  now  be  said  is,  that, 
as  far  as  is  known,  he  did  not  make  any  converts  to  his  opinions,  and 
that  his  objections  produced  no  change  in  the  faith  of  the  Christian 
world. 

No  further  attack  on  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  Daniel  seems 
to  have  been  made,  and  no  further  doubt  entertained,  until  the  time  of 
Spinoza.  Spinoza  was  by  birth  a  Jew ;  was  born  at  Amsterdam  in  1G32  ; 
became  professedly  converted  to  Chi'istianity  in  consequence  of  supposing 
that  his  life  was  in  danger  among  the  Jews,  but  was  probably  indifferent 
to  all  religions.  He  gave  himself  up  to  philosophical  inquiries,  and  is 
commonly  understood  to  have  been  a  pantheist.  He  maintained  (Tractat. 
Theol.  Politicus,  c.  10,  T.  i  p.  308  Ed.  Paulus)  that  the  last  five  chapters 
of  Daniel  were  v.-ritten  by  Daniel  himself,  but  that  the  seven  previous 
chapters  Avere  collected  about  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  from  the  chro- 
nological writings  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  that  the  whole  was  arranged  by 
some  unknown  hand.  Edward  Wells,  who  lived  in  the  first  part  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  maintained  that  the  work  was  composed  by  some  one 
soon  after  the  death  of  Daniel.  Antony  Collins,  one  of  the  British  Deists, 
maintained  also  that  it  was  not  written  by  Daniel.  In  more  recent  times, 
the  genuineness  of  the  book  has  been  doubted  or  denied,  in  whole  or  in 
part,  by  Corrodi,  Gesenius,  LUderwald,  Dereser,  Scholl,  Lengerke, 
Eichhorn,  De  Wette,  Griesenger,  Bertholdt,  Bleek,  Ewald,  Hitzig,  and 
Kirms ;  it  has  been  defended  by  the  English  writers  generally,  and 
among  the  Germans,  by  Stalidlin,  Beckhaus,  Jahn,  Havernick,  Heng- 
stenberg,  and  others.  The  general  ground  taken  by  those  Avho  have 
denied  its  genuineness  and  authenticity  is,  that  the  book  was  written  at 
or  about  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  by  some  Jew,  who,  in  order  to  give 
greater  authority  and  importance  to  his  work,  wrote  under  the  assumed 
name  of  Daniel,  and  laid  the  scene  in  Babylon  in  the  time  of  the  cap- 
tivity. 

The  various  arguments  urged  against  the  genuineness  of  the  book, 
may  be  seen  in  Bertholdt,  Eichhorn,  Lengerke,  Kirms  (CommentatioHis- 
torico  Critiea,  Jenae,  1828),  and  De  AVette.  The  best  defence  of  its  au- 
thenticity, probably,  is  the  work  of  Hengstenberg,  (Die  Authentic  des 
Daniel,  Berlin,  1831).  The  examination  of  the  objections  alleged  against 
the  particular  chapters,  and  particular  portions  of  chapters,  it  will  be 
most  convenient  to  examine  in  the  introductions  to  the  respective  chap- 
ters. I  propose,  in  this  general  Introduction,  merely  to  examine  the  ob- 
2 


SffV  INTRODUCTION. 

jections  of  a  general  character  which  have  been  made  to  the  vrork.  These 
have  been  concisely  arranged  and  stated  by  De  Wette  (Lehrbuch  der 
Ilistorisch-kritischen  Einleitung,  etc.  Berlin,  1845,  pp.  382 — 389),  and  in  the 
examination  of  the  olijections  I  shall  consider  them  in  the  order  in  which 
he  has  stated  them. 

The  view  which  De  Wette  entertains  of  the  book  is  stated  in  the  fol- 
lowing manner:  "  that  in  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  when  the 
spirit  of  prophecy  among  the  Jews  had  been  a  long  time  extinct,  a  Jew- 
ish friend  of  his  country  endeavoured  to  encourage  and  strengthen  his 
contemporary  sufferers,  and  those  who  were  contending  for  their  liberty, 
through  these  apocalyptic  prophecies  respecting  the  former  ascendency 
of  the  theocratic  principle,  which,  in  order  to  give  the  work  greater  repu- 
tation and  authority,  he  ascribed  to  an  ancient  Seer  of  the  name  of 
Daniel,  of  whom  probably  something  had  been  handed  down  by  tradition. 
Designedly  he  suffered  the  promises  to  extend  to  a  great  length  of  time, 
in  order  to  make  them  appear  the  more  certain.  After  the  manner  of  the 
ancient  prophets,  also,  he  inwove  much  that  was  historical,  and  especially 
such  as  would  be  fitted  to  excite  and  arouse  the  martyr  spirit  of  his  own 
people."     Lehrbvich,  p.  390. 

I.  The  first  objection  which  is  urged  against  the  genuineness  of  the 
book  is  derived  from  what  is  denominated  the  fabulous  contents — Miihrchen- 
haften  Inhalte — of  its  narrative  parts.  This  objection,  in  the  words  of 
De  Wette,  is  that  "  the  book  is  full  of  improbabilities  (ii.  3,  fF.  46,  f,  iii. 
1,  5,  f.  20,  22,  28,  f.  iii.  31,  flF.  31,  f.  v.  11,  f.  18,  fi".  29,  vi.  8,  fi".  26,  fi".)  ; 
of  wonders,  (ii.  28,  iii.  23,  fi".  v.  5,  vi.  23,  25)  ;  its  historical  inaccu- 
racies are  such  as  are  found  in  no  prophetic  book  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  are  founded  on  the  same  type  (Comp.  ii.  2 — 11,  with  iv.  4.  v.  8.  iii.  4 
— 12,  26 — 30,  with  vi.  8 — 18,  21 — 24).  This  seeking  after  wonders  and 
strange  things,  and  the  religious  fanaticism  nourished  through  these  per- 
secutions, which  it  breathes,  place  the  book  in  the  same  condition  as  the 
second  Book  of  the  IMaccabees,  as  a  production  of  the  time  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  and  the  similarity  of  the  former  of  the  two  books  betrays  the 
fictitious  character  (Dichtung)  of  the  book."     Lehrbuch,  pp.  382,  383. 

In  reference  to  this  objection,  which  turns  on  the  marvellous  charac- 
ter of  the  Book,  and  the  improbable  historical  statements  in  it,  the 
following  remarks  may  be  made  : 

(a)  These  objections  are  noticed  in  detail  in  the  Introductions  to  the 
respective  chapters  where  the  historical  events  here  objected  to  are  stated, 
and  the  question  whether  they  are  fabulous,  or  are  in  accordance  with 
true  history,  is  there  fully  considered.  This  will  make  it  needless  to  no- 
tice them  here  particularly.  In  the  Introduction  to  the  respective  chap- 
ters, I  have  noticed,  and  have  endeavoured  to  answer,  all  the  objections 
which  I  have  found  of  this  character  in  the  works  ofEichhorn,  Bertholdt, 
Blcek,  and  Lengerke.  This  will  make  it  the  less  necessary  to  dwell  on 
this  point  in  this  general  Introduction. 

(h)  But  as  to  the  alleged  contradiction  between  Daniel  and  the  his- 
torical accounts  which  we  have  of  the  afiairs  to  which  he  refers,  it  may 
be  proper  to  observe  in  general — (1.)  That,  for  anything  that  appears, 
Daniel  may  be  as  accurate  a  historian  as  any  of  the  heathen  Avriters  of 
those  times.  There  is,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  no  reason  why  we 
should  put  implicit  confidence  in  Berosus,  Abydenus,  Xenophon,  and 


INTRODUCTION.  XV 

Herodotus,  and  distrust  Daniel ;  nor  "why,  if  a  statement  is  omitted  by 
them,  -wc  should  concluds  at  once,  that  if  mentioned  by  Daniel  it  is  false. 
It  is  an  unhappy  circumstance,  that  there  are  many  persons  who  suppose 
that  the  fact  that  a  thing  is  mentioned  by  a  profane  historian  is  pre- 
sumptive evidence  of  its  truth  ;  if  mentioned  by  a  sacred  writer,  it  ia 
presumptive  evidence  of  its  falsehood.  Under  the  influence  of  the  same 
feeling  it  is  inferred,  that  if  an  event  is  mentioned  by  a  sacred  writer, 
which  is  omitted  by  a  profane  historian,  it  is  regarded  as  demonstrative  that 
the  work  in  which  it  is  found  is  fobulous.  It  is  unnecessary  to  show 
that  this  feeling  exists  in  many  minds ;  and  yet  nothing  can  be  more 
unjust — for  the  mere  fact  that  an  author  writes  on  sacred  subjects,  or  is  the 
professed  friend  of  a  certain  religion,  should  not  be  allowed  to  cast  a  sus- 
picion on  his  testimony.  That  testimony  must  depend,  in  i-egard  to  its 
value,  on  his  credibility  as  an  historian,  and  not  on  the  subject  on  which 
he  writes.  In  the  nature  of  things  there  is  no  more  reason  why  a  writer 
on  sacred  subjects  should  be  unworthy  of  belief,  than  one  who  is  record- 
ing the  ordinary  events  of  history.  (2.)  Daniel,  according  to  the  account 
which  wc  have  of  him,  had  opportunities  of  ascertaining  the  truth  of  the 
facts  which  he  narrates  which  no  profane  historian  had.  He  spent  the 
greater  part  of  a  long  life  in  Babylon,  in  the  very  midst  of  the  scenes 
which  he  describes  ;  he  was  intimately  acquainted  with  the  affairs  of  the 
eovernment;  he  enjoyed,  in  a  remarkable  degree,  the  confidence  of  those 
m  authority  ;  and  he  was  himself  deeply  concerned  in  most  of  these 
transactions,  and  could  have  adopted  the  language  of  .^neas — et  quorum 
magna  pars  fui.  (3.)  It  is  to  be  remembered,  also,  in  regard  to  these 
events  and  times,  that  we  have  few  fragments  of  history  remaining.  "We 
have  fragments  of  the  writings  of  Berosus,  a  Chaldean,  indeed,  who 
wrote  in  Greece  ;  and  of  Abydenus,  a  Greek,  who  wrote  in  Chaldea ;  we 
have  some  historical  statements  in  Xenophon,  and  a  few  in  Herodotus, 
but  the  Chaldean  history,  if  ever  written,  is  lost ;  the  public  documents 
are  destroyed  ;  the  means  of  an  accurate  and  full  knowledge  of  the  Chal- 
dean or  Babylonish  power  in  the  time  when  Daniel  lived,  have  disap- 
peared forever.  Under  these  circumstances,  it  would  not  be  strange  if 
we  should  not  be  able  to  clear  up  all  the  difficulties  of  a  historical  nature 
that  may  be  suggested  respecting  these  fragmentary  accounts,  or  be  able 
to  verify  the  statements  which  we  find  in  the  sacred  books  by  the  explicit 
testimony  cf  contemporary  writers. 

(c)  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  investigations  of  history,  as  far  as  they  can 
be  made,  go  to  confirm  the  authority  of  Daniel.  Instances  of  this  will 
occur  in  the  examination  of  the  particular  chapters  in  this  book,  and  all 
that  can  now  be  done  is  merely  to  refer  to  them,  particularly  to  the  intro- 
ductions to  chs.  i.  iv.  V.  vi.  In  general,  it  may  be  said  here,  that  none  of 
the  historical  authorities  contradict  what  is  stated  by  Daniel,  and  that  the 
few  fragments  which  we  have  go  to  confirm  what  he  has  said,  or  at  least 
to  make  it  probable. 

{d)  As  to  the  objections  of  De  Wette  and  others,  derived  from  the  mi- 
raculous and  marvellous  character  of  the  book,  it  may  be  observed  fur- 
ther, that  the  same  objection  would  lie  against  most  of  the  books  of  the 
Bible,  and  that  it  is,  therefore,  not  necessary  to  notice  it  particularly  in 
considering  the  Book  of  Daniel.  The  Bible  is  a  book  full  of  miracles  and 
marvels  ;  and  he  who  would  have  any  proper  understanding  of  it  musfc 


XVI  INTRODUCTION. 

regard  and  treat  it  as  such.  It  is  impossible  to  understand  or  explain 
it  -without  admitting  the  possibility  and  the  reality  of  miraculous 
events  ;  and  in  a  book  which  claims  to  be  founded  on  miracles,  it  docs  not 
prove  that  it  is  not  authentic  or  genuine  simply  to  say  that  it  assumes  that 
miracles  are  possible.  To  destroy  the  credibility  of  the  book,  it  is  ne- 
cessary to  show  that  all  claims  of  a  miraculous  character  are  unfounded, 
and  all  miracles  impossible  and  absurd ;  and  this  objection  would  not  lie 
against  the  Book  of  Daniel  peculiarly,  but  equally  against  the  whole 
Bible.  Two  remarks  here  may  be  made,  however,  of  a  more  particular 
character  :  (1.)  one  is,  that  the  statements  in  Daniel  are  not  more  mar- 
vellous than  those  which  occur  in  other  parts  of  the  Bible,  and  if  tlieij 
may  be  believed,  those  occurring  in  Daniel  may  be  also;  and  (2.)  the  other  is, 
that  it  would  rather  be  an  argument  against  the  genuineness  and  authen- 
ticity of  the  book  if  no  miraculous  and  marvellous  statements  were  found 
in  it.  It  would  be  so  unlike  the  other  books  of  the  Bible,  where  miracles 
abound,  that  we  should  feel  that  there  was  wanting  in  its  favour  the  evi- 
dence of  this  nature,  which  would  show  that  it  had  the  same  origin  as 
the  other  portions  of  the  volume.  The  particular  objections  in  regard 
to  the  statements  in  Daniel  of  this  nature,  are  considered  in  the  Notes 
on  the  Book. 

II.  A  second  objection  to  the  genuineness  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  re- 
lates to  the  ^?"op7iec2e5  which  are  found  in  it.  This  objection  is  derived 
from  the  peculiar  character  of  these  prophecies ;  from  the  minuteness 
of  the  detail ;  the  exact  designation  of  the  order  of  events  ;  the  fact  that 
they  seem  to  be  a  summary  of  history  written  after  the  events  occurred ; 
and  that  in  these  respects  they  are  essentially  unlike  the  other  prophe- 
cies in  the  Bible.  This  objection,  we  have  seen,  is  as  old  as  Porphyry  ; 
and  this  was,  in  fact,  with  him,  the  principal  argument  against  the  au- 
thenticity of  the  book.  This  objection  is  summed  up  and  stated  by  De 
Wette  in  the  following  manner  (^  255.  b.  pp.  384,  385) :  "  The  ungenu- 
ineness  (Unachtheit)  appears  further  from  the  prophetic  contents  of  the 
same,  which  is  to  a  remarkable  extent  different  from  that  of  all  the  remaining 
prophetic  books,  (a)  through  its  apocalyptic  character,  or  through  this — 
that  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah  is  mentioned  and  deter- 
mined according  to  certain  definite  periods  of  time,  or  specified  periods, 
and  that  the  representation  of  it  occurs  so  much  in  the  form  of  visions  ; 
(6)  that  the  circumstances  of  the  distant  future,  and  the  fortune  of  the 
kingdoms  which  were  not  yet  in  existence,  even  down  to  the  time  of  An- 
tiochus  Epiphanes,  are  described  with  so  much  particularity  and  accuracy 
(viii.  14,  ix.  25,  fif.  xii.  11,  ff.)  that  the  account  must  have  been  written 
after  the  event ;  (c)  and  that,  if  Daniel  was  a  prophet,  he  must  have 
lived  in  the  times  of  Ezekiel  and  Zechariah,  and  we  must  suppose 
that  his  prophecies  would  have  borne  the  general  character  of  the  prophe- 
cies of  those  times,  but  that  in  fact  we  find  in  them  the  spirit  of  a  later 
age^ — the  spirit  that  ultimately  developed  itself  in  the  Sibylline  Books,  to 
which  these  prophecies  bear  a  strong  resemblance." 

In  reply  to  this,  it  may  be  remarked  : 

(1.)  That  all  that  is  said  in  Daniel  is  j^ossible  : — that  is,  it  is  possible 
that  prophetic  intimations  of  the  future  should  be  given  with  as  much 
particularity  as  are  found  in  Daniel.  No  one  can  demonstrate,  or  even 
iffirm,  that  God  could  not,  if  he  chose,  inspire  a  prophet  to  predict  in  detail 


INTRODUCTION.  XYIl 

kkfc  -.fOccTfences  of  the  most  remote  times,  and  the  fall  of  kingdoms  not 
yet  la  liemg.  All  this  knowledge  must  be  with  him  ;  and  for  anything 
thai,  apptxirs,  it  would  be  as  easy  to  inspire  a  prophet  to  predict  ihcse 
events  as  any  other.  The  sole  inquiry,  therefore,  is  in  regard  to  a  fact ; 
and  this  Is  to  be  settled  by  an  examination  of  the  evidence,  that  the 
prophet  lived  and  prophesied  before  the  events  predicted  occurred. 

(2.)  The  prophecies  in  Daniel  are  not,  in  their  structure  and  character, 
60  unlike  those  whose  genuineness  is  undisputed,  as  to  make  it  certain 
or  even  probable,  that  the  latter  are  genuine,  and  those  of  Daniel  not. 
Dreams  and  visions  were  common  methods  of  communicating  the  Divine 
will  to  the  prophets,  (See  Introduction  to  Isaiah,  §  7.  (2),  (4),  and  who 
will  undertake  from  any  internal  evidence  to  determine  between  those 
of  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel  ? 

(3.)  As  to  the  allegation  respecting  the  details  in  Daniel  of  future 
events — the  particularity  with  which  he  describes  them — all  is  to  be 
admitted  that  is  affirmed  on  the  subject.  It  is  a  foct  that  there  is  such 
particularity  and  minuteness  of  detail  as  could  be  founded  only  on  truth, 
and  that  the  delineations  of  Alexander  and  his  conquests,  and  the  statements 
of  the  events  that  would  succeed  hid  reign  down  to  the  time  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  (ch.  xi.),  are  drawn  with  as  much  accuracy  of  detail  as  they 
would  be  by  one  writing  after  the  events  had  occurred.  No  one  can 
doul:)t  this  wdio  attentively  examines  these  remarkable  prophecies.  Por- 
phyry was  undoubtedly  right  in  affirming,  that  in  regard  to  their  minute- 
ness and  accuracy,  these  prophecies  appeared  to  be  written  after  the 
events  ;  and  if  it  can  be  shown,  therefore,  that  they  were  written  before  the 
events  referred  to,  the  testimony  of  Porphyry  is  a  strong  evidence  of  the 
fact  that  Daniel  was  inspired  ;  for  no  one  will  maintain  that  man,  by  any 
natural  sagacity,  could  describe  events  before  they  occur  with  the  exactness 
of  detail,  and  the  minute  accuracy  which  is  found  in  this  part  of  Daniel. 

But  is  not  what  is  here  said  of  Daniel,  as  to  the  accuracy  and  minute- 
ness of  detail  true  also,  in  the  main,  of  other  prophecies  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament ?  Are  there  not  many  prophecies  that  are  aa  accurate,  and  in 
some  respects  as  minute,  as  they  would  have  been  if  they  were  written  after 
the  events  referred  to  ?  Is  not  this  true  of  the  predictions  respecting  the 
destruction  of  Tyre  and  of  Babylon,  and  the  carrying  away  of  the  Jews 
into  captivity  ?  Is  not  Cyrus  expressly  mentioned  by  Isaiah,  and  is  not 
the  work  which  he  would  perform  in  the  conquest  of  Babylon  drawn  out 
in  exact  detail  ?  See  Isa.  xlv.  1.  seq.  So  in  Jeremiah  (1.  li.),  there  is 
a  prophetic  account  of  the  destruction  of  Babylon  as  minute  in  many  re- 
spects as  the  predictions  of  Daniel,  and  as  exact  and  minute  as  it  would 
have  been  if  written  after  the  events  had  occurred,  and  the  author  had 
been  making  a  historical  record  instead  of  uttering  a  prediction.  But 
on  this  point  I  must  content  myself  with  referring  to  the  argument  of 
Hengstenberg,  Authentie  des  Daniel,  pp.  173 — 195.  It  may  be  added, 
however,  that  it  is  on  this  accuracy  of  detail  in  Daniel  that  we  ground 
one  of  the  strong  arguments  for  his  inspiration.  It  will  be  admitted  on 
all  hands — it  cannot  be  denied — that  no  one  could  foresee  those  events 
and  describe  them  with  such  accuracy  of  detail,  by  any  natural  sagacity  ; 
but  no  one  who  believes  in  the  fact  of  inspiration  at  all,  can  doubt  that  it 
would  be  as  easy  for  the  Divine  Spirit  to  present  future  events  in  this 
accuracy  Df  detail  as  in  a  more  general,jBiaainer,     At  all  eveats,  this  a* 


XVIII  INTRODUCTION. 

curacy  and  minuteness  of  detail  removes  the  prophecies  from  the  regioE 
of  conjecture,  and  is  an  answer  to  the  usual  objections  that  they  ar« 
obscure  and  ambiguous.  Not  one  can  pretend  this  of  the  writings  of 
Daniel ;  and  if  it  can  be  shown  that  the  book  was  written  before  the  events 
occurred,  the  conclusion  cannot  be  avoided  that  the  author  was  inspired. 

III.  A  third  objection  to  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the  Book 
of  Daniel  is  thus  stated  by  De  Wette  (?  255,  b.  3,  p.  385) :  "  Grounds  of 
objection  lie  further  in  the  repeated  mention  of  Daniel  himself,  in  so  hon- 
ourable a  manner,  ch.  i.  17,  19,  f.  v.  11,  f.  vi.  4,  ix.  23,  x.  11,  et  al." 

This  objection  cannot  be  regarded  as  having  any  great  degree  of  force,  or 
as  contributing  much  to  set  aside  the  direct  evidence  of  the  authority  of  the 
■book: — for  (a)  it  is  possible  that  all  these  honours  were  conferred  on  him. 
This  is,  in  itself,  no  more  incredible  or  remarkable  than  that  Joseph 
should  have  reached  the  honours  in  Egypt,  which  are  attributed  to  him  in 
Genesis  ;  and  no  one  can  show  that  if  the  account  had  been  written  by 
another,  it  would  have  been  unworthy  of  belief,  (b)  If  it  were  a  fact  that 
he  was  thus  honoured,  it  was  not  improper  to  state  it.  If  Daniel  was 
the  historian  of  those  times,  and  kept  the  records  of  the  events  of  his  own 
life,  and  actually  obtained  those  honours,  there  was  no  impropriety  in  his 
making  a  record  of  those  things.  He  has  done  no  more  than  what 
Coesar  did  in  the  mention  of  himself,  his  plans,  his  conquests,  his  triumphs. 
In  the  record  of  Daniel  there  is  no  unseemly  parading  of  his  wisdom,  or 
the  honours  conferred  on  him ;  there  is  no  praise  for  the  mere  sake  of 
praise  ;  there  is  no  language  of  panegyric  on  account  of  his  eminent  piety. 
The  account  is  a  mere  record  of  facts  as  they  are  said  to  have  occurred — 
that  Daniel  was  successful  in  his  early  studies,  and  his  preparation  for  the 
examination  through  which  he  and  his  companions  were  to  pass  (ch.  i.) ; 
that  on  more  than  one  occasion  he  succeeded  in  interpreting  a  dream  or 
vision  which  no  one  of  the  Chaldeans  could  do ;  that  in  consequence  of 
this  he  was  raised  to  an  exalted  rank ;  that  he  was  enabled  to  maintain 
his  integrity  in  the  midst  of  extraordinary  temptations,  and  that  he  was 
favoured  with  the  Divine  protection  when  in  extraordinary  danger.  I 
presume  that  no  one  who  has  read  the  Book  of  Daniel  with  an  unpre- 
judiced mind,  ever  received  an  impression  that  there  was  any  want  of 
modesty  in  Daniel  in  these  records,  or  that  there  was  any  unseemly  or 
unnecessary  parading  of  his  own  virtues  and  honours  before  the  world. 

IV.  A  fourth  objection  which  has  been  urged  against  the  genuineness 
of  Daniel,  is  derived  from  the  language  in  which  it  is  written.  This  ob- 
jection, as  stated  by  De  Wette,  (  I  235,  b.  4,  p.  385,)  is  founded  on  "the 
corrupt  Hebrew  and  Chaldce,  and  the  intermingling  of  Greek  words  in 
the  composition."  The  objection  is  urged  more  at  length  in  Bertholdt, 
(p.  24,  seq.)  and  by  Bleek,  Kirms,  and  others.  The  objection,  as  derived 
from  the  language  of  the  book,  is  properly  divided  into  three  parts : — 
(a)  that  it  is  written  in  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  ;  (b)  that  in  each  part  of  it 
there  is  a  want  of  purity  of  style,  indicating  a  later  age  than  the  time 
of  the  captivity ;  and  (c)  that  there  is  an  intermingling  of  Greek  words, 
Bucli  as  it  cannot  be  presumed  that  one  who  wrote  in  the  time  of  the 
exile,  and  in  Babylon,  would  have  employed,  and  such  as  were  probably  in- 
troduced into  common  use  only  by  a  later  intercourse  with  the  Greeks, 
und  particularly  by  the  Macedonian  conquest. 
(a)  As  to  the  first  of  these,  little  stress  can  be  laid  on  it,  and  indeed  ii 


INTRODUCTION.  XIX 

is  rather  an  argument  for  the  genuineness  of  the  work  than  against  it. 
It  is  well  known  that  from  the  fourth  verso  of  the  second  chapter  to  the 
end  of  the  seventh  chapter,  the  work  is  written  in  the  Chaldee  language, 
while  the  remainder  is  pure  Hebrew.  The  only  way  in  which  this  fact 
could  be  regarded  as  an  objection  to  the  genuineness  of  the  book,  would  be 
that  it  is  an  indication  that  it  is  the  production  of  two  difi'erent  authors. 
But  this  would  be  an  objection  only  on  the  supposition  that  the  author 
could  write  and  speak  only  one  language,  or  that,  supposing  he  was  ac- 
quainted with  two,  there  were  no  circumstances  which  could  account  for 
the  use  of  both.  But  neither  of  these  suppositions  apply  here.  There 
is  every  reason  to  believe  that  Daniel  was  acquainted  with  both  the  He- 
brew and  the  Chaldee ;  and  there  is  no  improbability  in  the  supposition 
that  he  wrote  in  both  with  equal  ease.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  it  may 
be  remarked,  that  the  very  circumstance  here  referred  to,  is  a  confirma- 
tion of  the  genuineness  of  the  book ;  for  (1.)  it  accords  with  all  that  is 
known  of  Daniel.  He  was  a  youth  when  he  left  his  native  country,  and 
there  is  every  probability  that  he  was  familiar  with  the  Hebrew  in  early 
life,  and  that  he  would  never  forget  it,  though  it  might  be  true  that  he 
would  ordinarily  use  the  language  of  Chaldea.  H^  was  still  familiar 
with  the  Hebrew  books,  and  it  is  to  be  presumed  that  the  language  used 
by  the  Hebrews  in  exile  was  their  native  tongue.  In  all  his  intercourse 
with  his  own  countrymen,  therefore,  it  is  every  way  probable  that  he  would 
use  his  native  language,  and  would  thus  through  life  retain  his  know- 
ledge of  it.  (2.)  It  is  equally  clear  that  he  was  familiar  with  the  Chal- 
dee language.  He  was  early,  in  connection  with  three  other  Hebrew 
youth,  (ch.  i.  3,  4.)  placed  under  the  best  instruction  in  Babylon,  for  the 
express  purpose  of  acquiring,  with  other  branches  of  learning,  a  know- 
ledge of  the  "  tongue  of  the  Chaldeans ;"  and  he  speedily  made  such 
acquisitions  as  to  pass  with  honour  the  examination  appointed  before  he 
was  admitted  to  public  employment,  ch.  i.  18 — 20.  He  was,  moreover, 
employed  at  court  during  a  considerable  part  of  his  long  life,  and  no  one, 
therefore,  can  doubt  that  he  was  entirely  familiar  with  the  language  used 
in  Babylon,  and  that  he  could  compose  in  it  with  ease.  (3.)  It  is  evident 
that  the  work  must,  if  it  is  the  production  of  one  author,  have  been  com- 

Eosed  by  some  person  who  was,  in  this  respect,  in  the  circumstances  of 
•aniel ;  that  is,  by  one  who  was  familiar  with  both  the  languages  :  and 
the  circumstances  bear  on  their  face  evidence  that  the  work  was  written 
by  one  in  the  condition  in  which  Daniel  was  known  to  be  ;  that  is, 
one  who  had  been  early  trained  in  the  Hebrew,  and  who  had  lived  in 
Chaldea.  No  native-born  Hebrew,  who  had  not  lived  in  Chaldea,  would 
be  likely  to  be  so  well  acquainted  with  the  two  languages  that  he  could 
use  either  with  equal  facility  ;  and  it  may  be  presumed  that  no  native- 
born  Chaldean  could  evince  so  intimate  an  acquaintance  with  the  Hebrew. 
The  direct  evidence  that  it  is  the  production  of  one  author  will  be  ad- 
duced in  another  part  of  this  Introduction.  (4.)  It  is  by  no  means  pro- 
bable that  one  who  lived  so  late  as  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
could  have  written  the  book  as  it  is  written :  that  is,  that  he  would  have 
been  so  familiar  with  the  two  languages,  Hebrew  and  Chaldee,  that  he 
"ould  use  them  with  equal  ease.  It  ia  an  uncommon  thing  for  a  man  to 
Ti'ite  in  two  difi'erent  languages  in  the  same  work,  and  he  never  does  it 
Tithout  some  special  design— a  design  for  which  there  would  not  be  likely 


XX  INTRODUCTION. 

to  be  occasion  if  one  were  •writing  in  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
It  •was  perfectly  natural  that  Daniel  should  write  in  this  manner,  and 
perfectly  xinnatural  that  any  one  should  do  it  in  a  later  a_s;e,  and  in  dif- 
ferent circumstances.  If  the  book  had  been  forged  by  a  Hebre^w  in  the 
time  of  Antiochus  Epiphancs,  there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  he 
•would  have  been  careful  to  write  it  in  as  pure  Hebrew  as  possible,  for 
that  ■was  the  language  in  which  the  canonical  books  -were  written,  and  if 
he  had  endeavoured  to  gain  credit  for  the  book  as  one  of  divine  authority, 
he  would  not  have  intermingled  so  much  of  a  foreign  language.  If  he 
were  a  Chaldean,  and  could  write  Hebrew  at  all,  as  it  is  certain  that  the 
author  of  this  book  could,  then,  for  the  reason  just  given,  he  -R'ould  have 
been  careful  to  write  the  whole  book  in  as  pure  Hebrew  as  possible,  and 
would  not  have  jeoparded  its  credit  by  so  large  an  infusion  of  a  foreign 
tongue.  (5.)  This  reasoning  is  conclusive,  unless  it  be  supposed  that  the 
author  meant  to  represent  it  as  a  composition  of  some  Hebrew  in  the  time 
of  the  exile,  and  that  in  order  to  give  it  the  greater  verisimilitude  he 
adopted  this  device — to  make  it  appear  as  if  written  by  one  who  was  a 
native  Hebrew,  but  who  had  become  familiar  with  a  foreign  language. 
But  this  device  would  be  too  refined  to  be  likely  to  occur,  and,  for  the 
reasons  given  above,  would  be  difficult  of  execution  if  it  should  occur. 
Even  in  such  a  case,  the  writer  would  be  much  more  likely  to  represent 
its  author  as  writing  in  the  sacred  language  of  the  prophets,  in  order  to 
procure  for  himself  the  credit  of  employing  the  language  used  in  all  the 
divine  communications  to  men.  The  language  in  which  the  book  is  writ- 
ten, therefore,  is  just  such  as  it  would  be  on  the  supposition  that  it  is 
genuine,  and  just  such  as  it  would  not  be  on  the  supposition  that  it  is  a 
forgery  of  a  later  age. 

(b)  As  to  the  statement  that  the  language  is  corrupt  Hebrew  and  Chal- 
dee — in  der  Verderbten  sowohl  hehraischen  als  Chaldaishen  Sprache  (De 
Wette),  it  may  be  remarked  that  this  position  has  never  been  satisfacto- 
rily made  out,  nor  has  it  been  shown  that  it  is  not  such  as  might  be  em- 
ployed, or  would  be  employed,  by  one  who  resided  in  Babylon  in  the 
time  of  the  exile.  That  the  language  would  not  be  the  purest  kind  of 
Hebrew,  or  the  purest  Chaldee,  might  be  possible,  in  the  circumstances 
of  the  case  ;  but  it  could  be  shown  that  it  was  not  such  as  might  be  em- 
ployed there,  unless  there  are  words  and  forms  of  speech  which  did  not 
come  into  use  until  a  later  period  of  the  world.  This  has  not  been 
shown.  It  is  true  that  there  are  Persian  words  ;  but  this  is  not  unnatu- 
ral in  the  circumstances  of  the  case — bordering  as  Chaldea  did  on  Persia, 
and  during  a  part  of  the  time  referred  to  in  the  book,  being  actually  subject 
to  Persia.  It  is  true  that  there  are  Greek  words  ;  but  under  the  next  speci- 
fication I  shall  endeavour  to  show  that  this  does  not  militate  against  the 
supposition  that  the  book  may  have  been  written  in  Babylon  in  the  time 
of  the  exile.  It  is  true  that  there  are  words  and  forms  of  speech  whicli 
were  not  in  use  in  the  earlier  periods  of  Hebrew  literature,  but  which  be- 
came common  in  the  later  periods  of  their  literature ;  but  this  does  not  prove 
that  they  may  not  have  been  in  use  as  early  as  the  exile.  A  specimen  of 
the  words  referred  to — indeed  all  on  which  the  argument  is  founded — 
may  be  seen  inDe  Wette,  p.  385,  Note  {e.)  They  are  few  in  number,  and 
in  respect  to  none  of  these  can  it  be  j^^'ov^d  that  they  were  not  in  exist- 
ance  in  the  time  of  Daniel.     They  are  of  Persian,  of  Syriac,  or  of  Chaldee 


INTRODUCTION.  XXI 

ori'^in,  and  are  Buch  •words  as  would  be  likely  to  come  into  use  in  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  case.  In  regard  to  this  objection  it  may  be  added,  that 
it  has  been  abandoned  by  some  of  the  objectors  to  the  genuineness  of  tlio 
Book  of  Daniel  themselves.  Bleek  is  candid  enough  to  give  it  up  entirely. 
lie  says,  "  We  have,  in  general,  too  few  remains  of  the  different  centuries 
after  the  exile,  to  draw  any  conclusions  as  to  the  gradual  depreciation  of 
the  language,  and  to  determine  with  any  certainty  to  what  particular 
period  any  writer  belongs."  Zeitschr.  p.  213,  "  Daniel,"  says  Prof. 
Stuart,  "  in  the  judgment  of  Gesenius  (Geschich.  Heb.  Sprach.  p.  35),  has 
decidedly  a  purer  diction  than  Ezekiel ;  in  which  opinion,"  says  he,  "  as 
far  as  I  am  able  to  judge,  after  much  time  spent  upon  the  book,  and  exam- 
ining minutely  every  word  and  phrase  in  it  many  times  over,  I  should 
entirely  coincide."     Com.  p.  465. 

(c)  A  more  material  objection  is  derived  from  the  use  of  Greek  words 
in  the  composition  of  the  book.  That  there  are  such  words  is  undenia- 
ble ;  though  they  are  by  no  means  numerous.  Bertholdt  (pp.  24,  25,) 
has  enumerated  ten  such  words  ;  De  Wette  has  referred  to  four,  p.  386. 
The  words  enumerated  by  Bertholdt,  are,   Diams,  npoTiiiot ;  cjne>  <}>^tyna , 

NTno.  KIP^J  ;   n3)  KTipvaaciv  ;  DnnV>    '^^^'^P^i  ;  N33D,  aaiilivKJ]  ;    i:>»:dd1D>  cviitpcovta  ;  Ti3JDD» 

In  regard  to  this  objection,  it  may  be  remarked,  in  general,  that  it 
does  not  assert  that  the  structure  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  fashioned 
after  the  Greek  manner,  or  that  the  Greek  style  pervades  it ;  it  asserts 
only  that  a  few  Greek  words  have  been  incorporated  into  the  book.  The 
question  then  is,  whether  even  all  these  words  are  of  Greek  origin ;  and 
whether,  if  they  arc,  or  if  only  a  part  of  them  are,  their  use  in  the  book 
can  be  accounted  for  on  the  supposition  that  it  was  written  in  the  time 
of  the  captivity,  or  rather,  whether  their  occurrence  in  the  book  is  a 
proof  that  the  book  could  not  have  been  written  at  that  time. 

The  first  point  is  the  question,  whether  these  words  are  of  undoubted 
Greek  origin ;  and  this  question  will  require  us  to  examine  them  in  de- 
tail. 

(1.)  The  first  word  specified  is  D>poi5  partemvn — rendered  princes — (ch. 
i.  3,)  which  it  is  alleged  is  the  same  as  the  Greek  nponiioi — proUmoi.  The 
word  used  by  Daniel  occurs  only  in  two  other  places  in  the  Old  Testament 
(Esther  i.  3,  vi.  9),  where  it  is  rendered  nobles,  and  most  liable  ;  and  it  ia 
obvious  to  remark,  that  the  fact  that  it  is  found  in  Esther  might  be  urged 
in  proof  that  the  book  of  Daniel  was  written  at  the  time  in  which  it  is 
commonly  believed  to  have  been,  since  the  antiquity  and  genuineness  of 
the  book  of  Esther  is  not  called  in  question.  But  apart  from  this,  there 
is  no  evidence  that  the  word  is  of  Greek  origin.  Gesenius,  who  may  be 
considered  as  impartial  authority  on  the  subject,  says,  "  It  is  of  Persian 
r)rigin,  1 — 9.  Pchlvi  pardom-  the  first,  see  Auquetil  du  Perron  Zenda- 
vesta,  ii.  p.  468.  Comp.  Ssmscr.  prathama  the  first.  In  the  Zend  dialect 
the  form  is  peoerim.  Comp.  Sanscr.  pwa,  prius,  antea,  purana,  autiquus. 
From  the  former  comes  the  Greek  Trpoirffj,  and  from  the  latter  the  Latin 
primus."  Lex.  The  same  account  of  thw  origin  of  the  word  is  given  by 
Jahn,  De  Wette,  Bleek,  and  Kirms.  This  word,  then,  may  be  set  aside. 
It  is  indeed  objected  by  Bertholdt,  that,  though  the  word  had  a  Persian 
origin,  yet  there  is  no  evidence  that  it  would  be  used  in  Babylon  in  the 
time  of  the  exile.     But  this  objection  can  have  no  force.     Babylon  and 


XXII  INTRODUCTION.  | 

Persia  were  neighbouring  kingdoms,  and  there  is  no  presumption  that 
Persian  words  might  not  find  their  way  to  Babylon,  and  as  a  matter  of 
fact  such  words  occur  In  Jeremiah,  and  probably  in  Isaiah  and  in  Na- 
hum.  See  Ilcngstenberg,  pp.  11, 12.  The  truth  was,  that  the  Assyrians 
and  the  Medo-Perslans  were  originally  all  of  the  same  stem  or  stock,  and 
there  is  no  presumption  against  the  supposition  that  the  same  words 
might  be  found  in  each  of  the  languages  spoken  by  them. 

(2.)  The  next  word  referred  to  is  ajna,  pithgham,  (Dan.  ill.  16,  iv.  17, — 
rendered  matter),  which  it  is  alleged  is  the  same  as  the  Greek  ^Sty^a 
— pthegma.  The  word  occurs,  besides  these  places  in  Daniel,  in  Ezra  iv. 
17,  V.  11,  rendered  answer ;  v.  7,  rendered  letter;  and  vl.  11,  rendered 
word.  In  Hebrew  It  occurs  in  Esth.  i.  20,  rendered  decree,  and  in  Ecc. 
vIII.  11,  rendered  sentence.  In  respect  to  this  word,  also,  Gesenius  says, 
"The  origin  of  the  word  Is  to  be  sought  in  the  Persian,  In  which  vedam  is 
word,  edict,  mandate."  Lex.  The  fact,  also,  it  may  be  added,  that  it  is 
found  in  Esther,  in  Ezra,  and  the  book  of  Ecclesiastes,  is  sufficient  to  destroy 
the  objection  that  its  use  proves  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  was  written  later 
than  the  time  of  the  exile.  It  was  brought,  probably,  into  the  Greek 
language  from  the  common  origin  of  the  Persian  and  the  Greek. 

(3,  4.)  The  next  words  referred  to,  are  v.\\-o,  kdhroz  (a  herald),  ch.  iii. 
4,  and  jna  — Mraz,  to  cry  out,  to  make  proclamation,  which  it  is  alleged 
are  the  same  as  the  Greek  « '!P«J — herux,  and  xnpvaaciv — kerussein.  Of  these 
words,  also,  Gesenius  remarks,  "  The  root  is  widely  dlflfused  in  the  Indo- 
European  languages,  e.  q.  Sansc.  krus,  to  cry  out ;  Zenda.  khresio, 
crying  out,  a  herald;  Pers.  to  cry  out;  Qiv.  Kninaa^-^  also,  Kpi<,oi,  xpait^; 
Germ,  kreischen,  kreissen ;  Eng.  to  cry."  Lex.  Among  the  Christian 
Arabs,  Gesenius  remarks,  it  means  to  preach.  Jahn  and  Dei-eser  say 
that  the  word  Is  related  to  the  Zendish  word  khresio,  which  means  to 
tread  behind,  and  to  scream  out,  to  screech — kreischen.  Ilengstcnberg 
(p.  13,)  remarks  of  this  word,  that  Its  use  Is  spread  abroad  not  only  in 
Chaldee,  but  in  Syriac,  and  that  this  circumstance  makes  It  probable  that 
it  had  a  Semltlsh  origin.  The  probability  is,  that  this  word  and  the 
Greek  had  a  common  origin,  but  its  use  is  so  far  spread  in  the  world  that 
it  cannot  be  argued  that  the  fact  that  it  Is  found  in  the  Book  of  Daniel 
demonstrates  that  the  book  had  a  later  origin  than  the  period  of  the  exile. 

(5.)  The  next  word  mentioned  as  of  Greek  origin  is  D-in^t  kitharos,  (ch. 
iii.  5,  7,  10,  15,)  cithara,  harp,  h/re,  (rendered  In  each  place,  harp,) 
which  it  Is  said  is  the  same  as  the  Greek  *ci9apif,  citharis.  In  regard  to 
this  word,  which  is  the  name  of  a  musical  instrument,  it  Is  to  be  admitted 
that  it  Is  the  same  as  the  Greek  word.  It  occurs  nowhere  else  in  the 
Old  Testament,  and  Its  origin  is  unknown.  As  a  Greek  word,  it  will  be 
considered,  in  connection  with  the  three  others  of  the  same  class,  in  the 
sequel.  It  cannot  le  affirmed,  indeed,  that  it  has  a  Greek  origin,  but  its 
origin  cannot  be  found  in  the  Chaldee,  Persian,  or  Sanscrit  languages. 
But,  although  It  is  admitted  that  It  is  a  Greek  word,  and  denotes  an  in- 
strument that  was  well  known  In  Greece,  this  does  not  demonstrate  that 
it  is  of  Greek  origin.  It  Is  admitted  on  all  hands  that  the  names  of  Greek 
instruments  of  music  were  mostly  of  foreign  derivation  ;  and  there  la 
nothing  to  lead  to  the  supposition  that  this  was  of  Greek  origin,  unless  it 
be  that  the  word  (ciSupa  or  Kt&upof,  means,  in  the  Doric  dialect,  the  breast,  and 
that  this  instrument  might  have  received  its  name  either  because  it  was 


INTRODUCTION.  XXin 

played  by  being  placed  against  the  breast,  like  the  violin  -with  us,  or  be- 
cause its  form  resembled  the  human  breast.  This  is  the  opinion  of  Isi« 
dorus,  Origg.  i.  2, 21.     But  there  is  great  uncertainty  in  regard  to  this. 

(6.)  The  next  word  specified  is  nssd,  sahbeka  (ch.  iii.  5),  and  the  simi- 
lar word,  Kpai'  (ch.  iii.  7,  10,  15),  in  each  case  rendered  saclchut.  Of  this 
word  it  is  alleged  that  it  is  the  same  as  the  Greek  o-i/'/Jii/fr;, — samhuca,  a 
Btringed  instrument  well  known  in  Greece.  But  in  regard  to  this  word, 
also,  the  remark  of  Gesenius  maybe  quoted: — "  Strabo  affirms,"  says  he, 
"that  the  Greek  word,  aaytfivKn  (sambuca),  is  of  barbarian,  i.  e.  of  oriental 
origin,  and  if  so,  the  name  might  have  allusion  to  the  interweaving  of  the 
strings — from  the  root  "130" — to  intenceave,  to  entwine,  to  plait.  Gesenius, 
however,  remarks,  that  in  this  place  it  is  joined  with  a  word  (symphony) 
which  is  manifestly  of  Greek  origin  ;  and  he  seems  to  infer  that  this 
word,  also,  may  have  had  a  Greek  origin.  The  direct  affirmation  of  Strabo 
is  (Lib.  X.),  that  the  names  of  the  Greek  instruments  of  music  were  of 
foreign  origin,  and  in  reference  to  this  particular  instrument,  Athenjeus 
(i.  iv.)  affirms,  that  it  was  of  Syrian  origin.  So  Clemens  Alex,  expressly 
declares  that  the  sambuca  had  a  foreign  origin.  Strom.  L.  i.  p.  307. 
Even  Bleek  admits  this  in  regard  to  this  particular  instrument.  See 
Hengstenberg,  p.  15. 

(7.)  The  next  word  for  which  a  Greek  origin  is  claimed  is  k^jsoid 
symphony,  Greek  avyL(poivia,  ch.  iii.  5,  10,  15,  rendered  in  the  text,  in  each 
place,  dulcimer,  and  in  the  margin  symphony,  or  singing.  Gesenius  re- 
marks, in  regard  to  this  word,  that  "  it  is  the  Greek  word  adopted  into 
the  Chaldee  tongue,  just  as  at  the  present  day  the  same  instrument  is 
called  in  Italy,  zampogna,  and  in  Asia  Minor,  zamboiija."  It  cannot  be 
denied  that  the  word  is  the  same  as  the  Greek  word ;  though  it  is  to  be 
remarked  that  among  the  Greeks  it  was  not  used  to  denote  the  name  of 
an  instrument  of  music.  Yet,  as  it  is  compounded  of  two  Greek  words— 
oiv  and  0ajn) — its  Greek  origin  cannot  well  be  doubted.  With  the  Greeks, 
the  word  meant  properly  harmony,  or  concert  of  sounds  (Passoiv) ;  and 
it  was  then  readily  given  to  an  instrument  that  was  fitted  to  produce  har- 
mony, or  that  was  distinguished  for  its  sweet  sounds.  The  word  is 
found  in  Syriac,  as  applied  to  a  musical  instrument,  but  the  evidence 
seems  to  be  strong  that  the  loorcl  had  a  Greek  origin,  though  there  is  no 
evidence  that  the  Greeks  ever  applied  it  to  a  musical  instrument. 

(8.)  The  next  word  for  which  a  Greek  origin  is  claimed  is  pna^Ds,  and 
pnnjD?  —pesanterin,  (ch.  iii.  7,  5,  10,  15,  rendered  jssaZ^erj/  in  each  place,) 
which,  it  is  said,  is  the  same  as  the  Greek  ^paXTfipiov — psaltery.  "This  word," 
says  Gesenius,  {Lex.)  "  was  adopted  from  the  Greek  into  Chaldee,  S  and  j 
being  interchanged."  The  origin  of  the  word  is,  however,  wholly  uncer- 
tain. That  it  is  found  in  Greek  is  undoubtedly  true  ;  but,  as  has  been 
before  remarked,  as  it  is  admitted  that  the  names  of  the  Greek  instru- 
ments of  music  had  mostly  a  foreign  origin,  it  is  impossible  to  demon- 
strate that  this  may  not  have  been  true  in  regard  to  this  word.  Baxtorf 
(Lex.  Chald.)  says  that  it  is  a  word  "corrupted  from  the  Greek." 

(9.)  The  next  word  is  ^'ag,  patlish,  (ch.  iii.  21,  rendered  hosen,)  which 
it  is  said  is  the  same  as  the  Greek  ncrdaoi — petasos.  But  there  is  no  reason 
to  believe  that  this  word  had  an  original  Greek  origin.  It  is  found  in 
Syriac,  and  the  root,  -i'-^o—poLta^h,  Gesenius  remarks,  "  is  widely  found  in 


XXIV  INTRODUCTION. 

the  Indo-European  languages.  The  primary  form,"  says  he,  "  is  hatt,  patt, 
whence  later  Lat.  hat/ere;  French,  hattre;  Dutch,  hot;  Swed.  batsch,"  &c. 
The  Greek  word  has  undoubtedly  had  the  same  origin,  and  it  cannot  be 
maintained  that  the  Chaldee  word  is  derived  from  the  Greek. 

(10.)  The  remaining  word  which  is  alleged  to  be  of  Greek  origin  is, 
nan:,  nebirbah  (ch.  ii.  G,  v.  17),  rendered  in  both  cases  in  the  text,  re- 
wards,  and  in  the  maxgin,  fee.  It  does  not  elsewhere  occur  in  the  Old 
Testament.  It  is  maintained  by  Bertholdt  and  others,  that  this  is  the  same 
word  as  the  Greek  v6inana — money.  But  there  is  no  evidence  that  the 
word  is  of  Greek  origin.  Gesenius  says  {Lex.),  that  the  word  may  have 
a  Chaldee  origin,  though  he  prefers  to  assign  to  it  a  Persian  origin,  and 
he  says  that  the  idea  of  money  (implied  in  the  Greek  word)  is  foreign  to 
the  context  here.  Bohlen,  Winer,  and  Ilengstenberg,  agree  in  assigning 
the  word  to  a  Persian  origin.     See  Hengs.  Authen.  p.  12. 

The  result,  then,  to  which  we  have  come  in  regard  to  the  objection 
that  words  of  Greek  origin,  and  indicating  an  age  later  than  the  time  of 
the  exile,  are  found  in  Daniel,  is,  that  the  number  alleged  to  be  of  such 
an  origin  is  very  few  at  best,  and  that  of  those  which  have  been  referred 
to,  there  are  not  more  than  four  (marked  5,  G,  7,  and  8,  in  the  enumera- 
tion above,)  to  which  the  objection  can  be  supposed  to  apply  with  any 
degree  of  probability.  These  are  the  words  actually  selected  by  De 
Wette,  (p.  38G,)  as  those  on  which  he  relies. 

In  regard  to  these /ozfr  words,  then,  we  may  make  the  following  gene- 
ral observations : 

(a)  They  are  all  names  of  musical  instruments  said  to  have  been 
used  in  Babylon. 

(6)  The  general  remark  of  Strabo  above  referred  to  may  be  called  to 
recollection  here,  that  the  names  of  musical  instruments  among  the 
Greeks  were  mostly  of  foreign  origin.  In  itself  considered,  therefore, 
there  is  no  improbability  in  the  supposition  that  the  same  words  should 
be  applied  to  musical  instruments  in  Greece  and  in  Chaldea. 

(c)  The  languages  in  which  these  words  are  found  belong  to  the  same 
great  family  of  languages — the  Indo-European ;  that  is,  the  Persian,  the 
Greek,  the  Latin,  &c.  They  had  a  common  origin,  and  it  is  not  strange 
if  we  find  the  same  words  spread  extensively  through  these  languages. 

{d)  There  was  sufiBcient  intercourse  between  Persia,  Chaldea,  Asia 
Minor,  and  Greece,  before  and  at  the  time  of  the  Hebrew  captivity,  to 
make  it  not  improbable  that  the  names  of  musical  instruments,  and  the 
instruments  themselves,  should  be  borne  from  one  to  the  other.  There 
i?,  therefore,  no  improbability  in  supposing  that  such  instruments  may 
have  been  carried  to  Babylon  from  Greece,  and  may  have  retained  their 
Greek  names  in  Babylon.  Curtius  (b.  iv.  c.  12)  says,  that  in  the  Persian 
host  that  came  out  to  meet  Alexander  the  Great,  there  were  many  per- 
sons found  of  Greek  origin  who  had  become  subject  to  the  authority  of 
Media.  Far  farther  historical  proofs  on  this  subject,  see  Hengs.  Authen. 
pp.  16,  17.  Indeed,  little  proof  is  needed.  It  is  known  that  the  Greeks 
were  in  the  habit  of  visiting  foreign  lands,  and  particularly  of  travelling 
into  the  region  of  the  East,  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  knowledge ;  and 
nothing  is,  in  itself,  more  probable  than  that  in  this  way  the  names  of  a 
few  musical  instruments,  in  common  use  among  themselves,  should  have 
been  made  known  to  the  people  among  whom  they  travelled,  and  that 


INTRODUCTION.  XXV 

those  names  should  have  been  incorporated  into  the  languages  spoken 
there, 

V.  A  fifth  objection,  or  class  of  objections,  is  derived  from  the  alleged 
reference  to  usages,  opinions,  and  customs,  later  than  the  time  of  the 
exile.  This  objection,  which  embraces  several  subordinate  points,  is 
thus  summed  up  by  De  Wette  :  "  The  remarkable  later  representations 
on  the  subject  of  angels  (der  Angelologie,  iv.  14,  ix.  21,  x.  13,  21 ;  of 
Christology,  vii.  13,  f.  xii.  1 — 3  ;  of  dogmatics  [or  doctrines,  Dogmatik,] 
xii.  2,  f. ;  of  riorals  [Sittenlehre]  or  customs,  iv.  24,  Comp.  Tobit,  iv. 
11,  xii,  9;  and  of  asceticism  [Askese],  i.  8 — 16,  Comp.  Esther  iv.  17, 
2  Mac.  v.  27,  vi.  11,  furnish  at  least  an  additional  argument  [einen  Ilulfs- 
beweis]  against  the  genuineness  of  the  book."     §  255,  c.  (5}. 

This  objection,  it  will  be  observed,  divides  itself  into  several  parts  or 
portions,  though  coming  under  the  same  general  description.  The  gene- 
ral statement  is,  that  there  is  an  allusion  to  customs  and  opinions  which 
were  found  among  the  Jews  only  at  a  later  period  than  the  captivity,  and 
that,  therefore,  the  book  could  not  have  been  composed  at  the  tinie  al- 
leged. The  specifications  relate  to  angelology,  or  the  representations  re- 
specting angels ;  to  christology,  or  the  views  of  the  Messiah  ;  to  the 
doctrines  stated,  particularly  to  those  respecting  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead  and  the  final  judgment;  to  the  customs  that  prevailed,  and  to  the 
ascetic  views  expressed,  particularly  on  the  effect  of  abstinence  from  rich 
kinds  of  diet.  It  will  be  convenient  to  notice  them  in  their  order,  so  far 
as  to  furnish  a  general  answer.  Most  of  them  will  be  noticed  more  par- 
ticularly in  the  Notes  on  the  passages  as  they  occur ;  and  for  a  full  and 
complete  answer  the  reader  may  be  referred,  in  general,  to  Hengstenberg, 
Authentic  des  Daniel,  pp.  137 — 173. 

A.  The  first  specification  is  derived  from  the  statements  which  occur 
respecting  angels,  ch,  iv.  14,  ix.  21,  x.  13,  21.  These,  it  is  aflSrmed,  in- 
dicate a  state  of  opinion  which  prevailed  among  the  Hebrews  only  at  a 
later  age  than  the  time  of  the  exile,  and  consequently  the  book  could  not 
have  been  written  at  that  time.  This  objection,  as  urged  by  Bertholdt 
and  others,  refers  to  two  points ;  first,  that  the  statements  respecting  the 
opinions  of  the  Chaldeans  on  the  subject,  are  not  in  accordance  with  the 
opinions  in  the  time  when  the  book  is  said  to  have  been  written ;  and  se- 
cond, that  the  statements  respecting  angels,  considered  as  Hebrew  opin- 
ions, are  those  which  belong  to  a  later  age.  It  will  be  proper  to  notice 
these  in  their  ordei*. 

I.  The  first  is,  that  the  statements  which  occur  as  representing  the 
opinions  of  the  Chiildeans,  express  sentiments  which  did  not  prevail 
among  them.  The  objections  on  this  point  relate  to  two  statements  in  the 
book ;  one,  that  tlie  Son  of  God,  or  a  Son  of  God,  is  spoken  of  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar ;  the  other,  to  what  is  said  (ch.  iv.  14,)  of  the  "  decree  of  the 
Watchers." 

The  former  objection  is  thus  stated  by  Bertholdt:  In  ch.  iii.  25, 
"  Nebuchadnezzar  speaks  of  a  Son  of  God  ['  and  the  form  of  the  fourth  is 
like  the  Son  of  God'],  and  although  the  Chaldeans,  and  most  of  the 
dwellers  in  Upper  Asia,  were  polytheists,  yet  there  is  no  evidence  that 
anything  was  known  at  the  time  of  the  views  which  prevailed  among  the 
Greeks  on  this  subject,  but  that  such  views  became  known  iu  the  time  of 
3 


XXVI  INTRODUCTION. 

Seleucus  Nicator."  p.  29.     It  is  hence  inferred  that  the  book  could  not 
have  been  ■u-ritten  before  the  time  of  Seleucus. 

In  regard  to  the  objection,  it  may  bo  observed,  in  addition  to  ^vhat  is 
said  in  the  Notes  on  the  passage,  (ch.  iii.  25,)  ^vhere  the  expression  oc- 
curs, that  the  objection  is  so  vague  and  indefinite  that  it  scarce  needs  a 
reply.  The  opinions  which  prevailed  in  the  East  on  the  subject  of  the 
gods,  is  so  little  known  now  that  it  is  impossible  to  demonstrate  that  such 
an  opinion  as  this  might  not  have  existed  in  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
and  impossible  to  prove  that  such  views  as  would  have  suggested  this 
expression  did  not  prevail  before  the  time  of  Seleucus  Nicator.  Indeed, 
it  is  not  easy  to  show  that  such  language  as  is  here  ascribed  to  Nebu- 
chadnezzar would  have  been  more  likely  to  have  been  suggested  by  the 
views  of  mythology  that  prevailed  in  Greece,  and  that  were  spread 
abroad  in  consequence  of  the  difference  of  Greek  opinions  in  the 
l.'ast,  than  by  the  views  which  prevailed  in  Babylon  in  the  time  of  the 
exile.  But  it  may  be  more  particularly  observed  in  reply  to  the  objection, 
(a)  That  according  to  Gesenius  (Thes.  p.  237),  this  language,  as  used 
by  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  such  as  would  properly  denote  merely  one  of  the 
gods,  or  one  in  the  form  of  the  gods  ;  that  is,  one  who  resembled  the  gods — 
in  the  same  way  as  the  phrase  "son  of  man"  denotes  a  man,  or  one  in  the 
form  and  appearance  of  a  man.  Perhaps  this  was  all  that  was  meant  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  ;  at  least  that  is  all  that  can  be  demonstrated  to  have  been 
his  meaning,  or  all  that  is  necessarily  implied  in  his  words.  See  Notes 
on  the  passage.     But, 

(6)  Thei'e  were  opinions  which  prevailed  in  Chaldea  on  the  subject  of 
the  gods  which  would  fully  justify  the  use  of  such  language.  That  they 
regarded  one  portion  of  the  gods  as  descended  from  another,  or  as  be- 
gotten by  another  ;  that  they  looked  upon  them  as  constituting  families, 
in  a  way  similar  to  the  Greeks,  and  particularly  that  they  regarded  Bel, 
their  supreme  god,  always  accompanied  by  the  goddess  Mylitta,  as  the 
father  of  the  gods,  has  been  abundantly  demonstrated.  On  this  point, 
see  Gesenius,  Com.  zu.  Isai.  ii.  332,  seq.  (Beylage  ^  2,  Gottheiten  der 
Chaldaer),  and  Creuzer,  Synibolik,  on  the  word  Mi/Iitia,  i.  231,  ii.  331, 
333,  350,  4G0.  The  idea  of  derivation,  descent,  or  birth,  among  the  gods, 
was  one  that  Avas  quite  f^imiliar  to  the  Chaldeans,  perhaps  as  much  so  as 
to  the  Greeks.  In  fact,  this  has  been  so  common  an  opinion  among  all 
polytheists,  that  it  is  rather  to  be  presumed  that  it  would  be  found  every- 
where among  the  heathen  than  otherwise. 

The  other  objection  on  this  point  is  derived  from  what  is  said  of  the 
Watchers,  ch.  iv.  13,  17.  The  objection  is,  that  there  are  betrayed  here 
traces  of  a  later  Parsish-Jewish  representation;  that  is,  that  this  indicates 
that  the  book  was  composed  in  later  times. 

In  regard  to  the  vieaning  of  this  language,  see  notes  on  ch.  iv.  13. 
Perhaps  a  reference  to  this  Note,  where  the  probability  that  such  a  term 
would  be  used  in  Babylon  is  shown,  is  all  that  is  necessary  in  answering 
the  objection.  But,  in  addition  to  this,  an  observation  of  Diodorus 
Siculus  may  be  introduced  here.  I  copy  it  as  I  find  it  in  Gesenius,  Com. 
Ku.  Isa.  vol.  ii.  pp.  333,  334.  Diodorus  is  speaking  of  the  sun,  moon,  and 
five  planets  as  adored  by  the  Chaldeans,  and  adds,  ''To  the  course  of  these 
stars,  there  are,  as  they  say,  thirty  others  that  are  subordinate,  which  are 
•epresented   as  divine  counsellors  {iioi  /JoiXai'oi — consulting  gods,    as   wa 


INTRODUCTION.  XXVII 

would  say,)  of  whcdn  one  half  has  the  supervision  of  the  regions  under 
the  earth  ;  the  other  half  has  the  supervision  of  things  on  tlie  earth, 
among  men,  and  in  heaven.  Every  ten  days  is  one  of  them  sent  as  a 
messenger  of  the  stars  from  those  above  to  those  below,  and  from  those 
below  to  those  above."  This  quotation  will  render  it  unnecessary  to  say 
anything  more  as  to  the  question,  whether  it  is  improbable  that  such 
language  would  be  used  by  one  residing  in  Babylon  in  the  time  of  the 
exile.  It  is  to  be  remembered  that  this  is  language  which  is  represented 
in  a  dream  as  having  been  addressed  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  the  quota* 
tion  proves  that  it  is  such  language  as  would  be  likely  to  occur  to  the 
king  of  Babylon  in  the  visions  of  the  night.  It  was  sucii  language  as  he 
must  have  been  accustomed  to,  and  so  far  is  the  use  of  this  language 
from  being  an  objection  to  the  genuineness  of  Daniel,  that  it  might  rather 
have  been  urged  as  a  inoof  of  it,  since  it  is  not  probable  that  it  would 
have  been  used  by  one  who  was  not  familiar  with  the  customary  ideas  of 
the  Chaldeans. 

(2.)  The  other  form  of  the  objection  derived  from  the  statements  re- 
specting the  angels  in  the  Book  of  Daniel,  refers  to  the  opinions  held 
among  the  Hebrews  themselves.  The  general  objection  is,  that  these 
are  representations  respecting  the  ranks,  and  orders,  and  names  of  the 
angels  which  pertain  only  to  later  times  in  the  history  of  Jewish  opinions, 
and  which  did  not  exist  in  the  period  of  the  exile.  This  objection 
divides  itself  into  several  specifications,  which  it  may  be  proper  to  notice 
briefly  in  their  order. 

(a)  One  is,  that  there  is  in  the  book,  and  particularly  in  oh.  viii.  16, 
an  allusion  to  the  Persian  doctrine  of  the  seven  Amhaspands,  or  angels 
that  stand  before  God,  and  that  this  idea  is  found  only  in  times  later  than 
the  exile.     Bertholdt,  p.  528. 

To  this  the  answer  is  obvious  :  (1.)  That  there  is  no  manifest  allusion 
to  that  Persian  doctrine  in  the  book,  and  no  statement  which  would 
not  as  readily  have  been  made  if  that  doctrine  had  no  existence — since  it 
is  a  mere  representation  of  angels  with  certain  names,  and  with  no  par- 
ticular reference  to  the  number  seven;  and  (2.)  if  this  were  so,  it  is  cer- 
tain that  this  representation  occurs  in  the  Zendavesta,  and  the  Zendavesta 
was  composed  in  a  distant  antiquity,  probably  long  before  the  time  of 
the  exile,  and  certainly  before  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great.  See 
Creuzer,  Symbolik,  i.  183,  scq.,  and  the  authorities  there  referred  to. 
This,  then,  if  it  were  true  that  the  doctrine  of  the  seven  Amhaspands  is 
found  in  the  book  of  Daniel,  and  was  derived  from  the  Zendavesta,  or 
the  Persian,  would  remove  the  objection  so  iar  as  to  show  that  the  book 
was  composed  before  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  or  at  least  that 
there  is  no  reason,  from  this  Cjuarter,  to  suppose  that  it  was  written 
aftenvards.  But  the  truth  is,  that  the  doctrine  respecting  angels  and 
intermediate  beings  was  so  prevalent  a  doctrine  all  over  the  East,  that 
this  objection  can  have  no  solid  foundation. 

(b)  It  is  objected,  that  there  are  found  in  this  book  representations  of 
the  angels,  in  reference  to  their  ranks  and  orders,  which  are  opinions  of 
the  Jews  of  a  later  age,  and  which  did  not  exist  in  the  time  of  the  exile, 
and  that,  therefore,  the  book  had  a  later  origin  than  the  captivity. 
Bertholdt. 

To  this  it  is  sufficient  to  reply,  (1.)  that  such  a  representation  of  ranka 


XXVm  INTRODUCTION. 

and  orders  of  angels  is  implied  in  Isa.  vi.  1,  seq.,  in  the  account  of  the 
Seraphim,  a  representation  Avhich  supposes  that  there  are  angels  of 
exalted  rank  and  names  ;  (2.)  That  there  are  traces  of  such  an  opinion  in 
much  earlier  ages,  as  in  Psa.  cxxiii.  20 ;  Ixviii.  17  ;  (3.)  That  this  repre- 
sentation of  differences  in  the  ranks  of  angels  is  one  that  j^revailb-  in  the 
Old  Testament;  and  (4.)  That,  for  anything  that  appears,  all  that  is  im- 
plied in  Daniel  may  have  been  a  matter  of  common  belief  in  his  time. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  book  -which  would  indicate  any  very  definite 
arrangement  of  the  angels  into  orders,  though  it  is  evidently  implied  that 
there  ai-c  different  degrees  in  the  ranks  of  the  angelic  hosts,  (ch.  x.  5,  13, 
xii.  1,)  but  this  was  a  common  opinion  in  the  East,  and  indeed  has  been 
a  common  sentiment  where  a  belief  in  the  existence  of  angels  has  pre- 
vailed at  all. 

(c)  It  is  objected  that  names  are  given  to  the  angels — the  name  of 
Gabriel  and  Michael,  and  that  this  is  indicative  of  a  later  age.  To  this, 
also,  it  may  be  replied,  (1.)  That  long  before  this  we  find  the  name  Saiaii 
given  to  the  leader  of  evil  angels.  Job  i.  6,  and  there  is  no  presumption 
against  the  belief  that  names  may  have  been  given  to  good  angels  also ; 
(2.)  That  even  if  the  practice  had  not  prevailed  before,  no  reason  can  be 
assigned  why  the  angels  who  appeared  to  Daniel  may  not  have  assumed 
names,  or  been  mentioned  under  appropriate  titles  to  designate  them,  aa 
well  as  those  who  appeared  in  after  times  ;  and  (3.)  That,  for  anything 
that  appears,  the  fact  that  names  were  given  to  the  angels  among  the 
Jews  of  later  times  may  have  had  its  origin  in  the  time  of  Daniel,  or  may 
have  occurred  from  the  fact  that  he  actually  mentioned  them  under 
epecific  names. 

{d)  A  similar  objection  is,  that  the  statement  in  ch.  vii.  10,  that 
''  thousand  thowsands  ministered  unto  him,  and  ton  thousand  times  ten 
thousand  stood  before  him,"  is  also  a  statement  that  had  its  origin  in  the 
representation  of  a  Persian  court — in  the  numbers  that  stood  round  the 
throne  of  a  Persian  monarch,  and  that  this  indicates  a  later  age,  or  a 
Persian  origin.  To  this  objection  it  is  sufficient  to  refer  to  Isaiah,  vi., 
and  to  the  Notes  on  this  passage.  But  we  have  other  representations  of 
the  same  kind  abounding  in  the  Scriptures,  in  which  God  is  described  as 
a  magnificent  monarch,  attended  and  surrounded  by  hosts  of  angels,  and 
the  same  objection  would  lie  against  them  which  is  urged  against  the  ac- 
count in  Daniel.  See  particularly  Job  i.  2;  1  Kings,  xxii.  19 — 22; 
Deut.  xxxiii.  2  ;  Ps.  Ixviii.  18. 

(e)  Another  objection  from  the  representations  of  the  angels,  is  derived 
from  what  in  said  of  their  interposition  in  human  affairs,  and  their  ap- 

fearing  pririicularly  as  the  guardians  and  protectors  of  nations,  in  ch.  x. 
2,  20;  xii.  1,  which  it  is  said  indicates  opinions  of  a  later  age.  In  reply 
to  this,  all  that  is  necessary  is  to  refer  to  the  copious  Notes  on  these  pas- 
sages, where  the  foundation  of  that  opinion  is  examined,  and  to  add  that 
no  one  can  demonstrate  that  that  opinion  may  not  have  had  an  existance 
as  early  as  the  time  of  the  exile.  Indeed,  it  was  a  common  opinion 
in  ancient  times — an  opinion  whose  origin  no  one  now  can  determine — 
an  opinion  whose  correctness  no  one  can  disprove.  That  this  was  a  pre- 
vailinq  opinion  in  ancient  times,  is  admitted  by  Bertholdt  himself,  pp. 
32,  2i,  705—707. 
lu  general,  therefore,  it  may  be  remarked  respecting  the  objections 


INTRODUCTION.  XXIX 

derived  from  the  angeiology  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  (a)  that  there  j:^ay 
he  things  occurring  in  the  book  Avhich  were  suggested  by  opinions 
prevailing  in  Babylon  and  the  East;  (b)  that  the  statements  in  Daniel — 
the  revelations  made  to  him  as  an  eminent  prophet — may  have  been  the 
germ  of  the  opinions  which  prevailed  among  the  Jews  in  later  times,  de- 
velopments of  which  we  have  in  the  books  of  the  Apocrypha,  and  in  the 
later  Babbincal  writings.  If  so,  the  objection  derived  from  the  angei- 
ology of  the  book  is  entirely  unfounded. 

B.  The  second  objection  derived  from  the  alleged  reference  to  latei 
customs  and  opinions,  is  founded  on  the  ChristoloQii  of  the  book,  or  the- 
doctrine  relating  to  the  Messiah.  The  objection  is,  that  the  opinions 
which  are  found  in  the  book  belong  to  a  later  age  ;  or  that  in  tlie 
time  of  the  exile  no  such  views  exist  in  the  genuine  writings  of  the 
prophets,  and  that  consequently  the  book  must  have  been  composed 
when  those  later  views  had  come  to  prevail.  The  vieAvs  referred  to  as 
the  ground  of  the  objection,  are  found  in  ch.  vii.  13, 14,  and  xii.  1 — 3.  This 
objection,  thus  stated  by  De  Wette,  has  been  expanded  by  Bertholdt  and 
Others,  and  properly  embraces,  as  stated  by  them,  four  specifications, 
which  it  will  be  convenient  to  notice  in  their  order. 

(1.)  The  first  is,  that  in  the  time  of  the  exile,  the  doctrine  of  the  Mes- 
siah had  not  become  so  developed  that  it  was  expected  that  he  would  ap- 
pear in  glory  and  majesty,  and  set  up  a  kingdom  upon  the  earth,  as  is  im- 
plied in  ch.  vii.  13,  14.     See  Bertholdt,  p.  31. 

In  reply  to  this,  all  that  is  necessary  to  be  said  is,  to  refer  to  the 
prophecies  in  the  other  portions  of  the  Old  Testament,  whose  antiquity 
and  genuineness  are  undoubted.  In  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah,  there  are 
predictions  of  the  Messiah  as  clear,  as  definite,  as  distinct,  as  any 
that  occur  in  Daniel ;  and  no  one  can  compare  the  prophecies  found 
in  other  parts  of  the  Old  Testament  with  those  found  in  Daniel,  and  de- 
termine by  any  internal  evidence  that  one  class  must  have  been  written 
before,  and  another  after,  the  time  of  the  exile.  Besides,  why  may  not 
the  predictions,  under  the  spirit  of  inspiration,  have  been  more  clearly 
communicated  to  one  prophet  than  to  another — to  Daniel  than  to  Isaiah  ? 
And  why  may  not  some  circumstances  respecting  the  Messiah  and  his 
reign  have  been  made  to  one  rather  than  to  another  ?  If  it  be  admitted  that 
all  that  occurs  in  the  first  part  of  Isaiah  (chs.  i. — xxxix.)  was  actually 
revealed  to  him,  and  recorded  by  him,  previous  to  the  exile,  there  can  be 
no  difiiculty  in  admitting  that  what  is  found  in  Daniel  may  have  been 
communicated  and  recorded  at  the  time  of  the  exile.  In  proof  of  what 
is  here  said,  it  is  only  necessary  to  refer  to  Ilengstensberg's  Christology, 
vol.  1.  The  Messianic  prophecies  there  collected  and  illustrated.  Gen.  iii. 
14,  15,  ix.  26,  27,  xlix.  10,  Num.  xxiv.  17,  Deut.  xviii.  15—18,  Ps.  ii.  xlv 
ex.  xvi.  xxii.  Isa.  ii. — iv.  vii.  xi.  xii.,  furnish  statements  as  clear,  in  many 
respects,  respecting  the  Messiah  as  anything  in  Daniel,  and  of  many  of 
these  statements  it  might  as  well  be  alleged  that  they  are  couched  in  the 
language  of  later  times,  as  anything  that  occurs  in  the  book  before  us. 

(2.)  It  is  alleged  further,  of  the  Christology  of  Daniel,  that  the  ideas 
respecting  the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah  are  stated  in  the  language  of  later 
times.  Bertholdt,  p.  31.  In  proof  of  this  Bertholdt  refers  to  ch.  ii.  44, 
/ii.  13,  seq. 

This  is  the  same  objection  in  another  form.  The  reply  to  it  is  obvious. 
3* 


XXX  IIjITKODUCTION.  | 

(a)  If  Daniel  is  admitted  to  be  a  true  prophet,  there  is  no  presumptioi 
against  the  supposition  that  some  ideas  may  have  been  imparted  to  him 
which  might  not  be  found  in  other  prophets — any  more  than  that  circum- 
stances respecting  the  power  and  kingdom  of  the  Messiah  may  have  been 
communicated  to  Isaiah  which  were  not  to  the  earlier  prophets  ;  and  [h) 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  as  before  stated,  many  of  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  are  as 
minute  and  as  clear  in  regard  to  the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah  as  those  in 
Daniel.  Compare  Isa.  ix.  6,  7.  No  one  could  place  that  prediction  by  the 
side  of  the  prediction  in  Daniel  vii.  13,  14,  and  determine  from  any  inter- 
nal evidence  that  the  one  was  written  before  the  exile,  and  that  the  other 
was  couched  in  tlie  language  of  later  times. 

(3.)  It  is  objected  (Bertholdt  p.  31),  that  the  sentiment  found  in 
Daniel  (ch.  sii.  1,)  that  the  setting  up  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Mes- 
siah  would  be  preceded  by  times  of  trouble,  is  a  doctrine  of  the 
Rabbincal  writings  of  later  times,  and  savors  of  a  later  origin  than 
tlie  times  of  the  exile.  To  this,  also,  the  reply  is  obvious,  (a)  It 
is  to  be  admitted  that  this  idea  occurs  in  the  Rabbincal  writings,  and  that 
it  was  a  common  doctrine  among  the  Jews  ;  but  can  any  one  demonstrate 
that  the  doctrine  had  not  its  origin  in  this  very  passage  in  Daniel  ?  It  is 
quite  as  philosophical  to  suppose  that  this  language  may  have  been 
found  in  the  genuine  language  of  the  prophets,  and  that  the  doctrine  may 
have  sprung  up  from  that  cause,  as  to  suppose  that  it  was  first  originated 
by  uninspired  men  among  the  Jews,  and  then  embodied  in  a  pretended 
prophecy,  [h)  It  was  natural  that  Daniel,  if  a  real  prophet,  should  con- 
nect the  two  things  together,  not  in  time,  but  in  the  range  of  vision.  See 
Intro,  to  Isa.  ^  7,  iii.  (5).  Placing  himself  in  prophetic  vision  in  the 
midst  of  foreseen  trouble  coming  upon  his  country,  it  was  natural  that 
the  mind  should  be  directed  to  brighter  days  and  that  he  should  en- 
deavour to  cheer  his  own  heart,  and  to  comfort  his  afflicted  countrymen, 
by  dwelling  on  happier  scenes  when,  under  the  Messiah,  these  troubles 
would  cease,  (c)  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  same  thing  elsewhere  occurs. 
Thus  Isaiah  (ch.  xl.  and  onward,)  describes  the  coming  of  the  kingdom 
of  the  Messiah,  by  connecting  it  with  the  deliverance  from  the  calamities 
that  would  come  upon  the  Jewish  people  in  the  time  of  the  captivity.  He 
seeks  to  comfort  them  in  their  troubles  by  the  assurance  of  better  days  ; 
and  in  describing  their  return  to  their  own  land,  the  mind  of  the  prophet 
insensibly  glides  on  to  the  coming  of  the  Messiah — to  the  happier  times 
that  would  occur  under  him — to  the  deliverance  from  the  bondage  of  sin 
and  to  the  setting  up  of  a  kingdom- of  peace  and  truth  in  the  world  ;  and 
the  description  which  began  with  the  troubles  of  the  exile,  and  the  return 
to  their  own  land,  ends  with  a  sublime  and  glorious  view  of  the  times  of 
the  Messiah,  and  of  the  happiness  of  the  world  under  his  reign.  And  it 
may  be  added  that  this  is  in  accordance  with  a  general  principle  laid 
down  in  theBiblo.  "  But  the  Lord  shall  judge  his  people,  and  repent 
himself  for  his  servants,  when  he  saith  that  their  power  is  gone,  and 
there  is  none  shut  up  or  left."  Deut.  xxxii.  36.  Comp.  Isa.  xi.  11,  and 
the  Notes  of  Gosenius  on  that  place.  See  also  IIos.  iii.  5,  Amos  ix,  14, 
15,  Micah  iv.  G,  7,  Joel  v.  6,  7,  Zeph.  iii.  19,  20,  Jer.  xxiii.  8,  xxxiii.  7. 
Ezek.  xxxvi.  2G. 

(4.)  A  fourth  specification  respecting  the  Christology  in  the  Book  of 
Daniel,  is  derived  from  the  reference  to  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection 


INTRODUCTION.  XXX3 

rfi,  xii.  2.  It  is  objected  that  this  is  a  doctrine  of  later  times,  and  that 
it  could  not  have  been  known  in  the  age  when  Daniel  is  said  to  have 
lived. 

That  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  is  referred  to  in  that 
passage,  or  that  what  is  there  said  is  based  on  the  belief  of  that  doctrine, 
and  implies  that  the  doctrine  was  so  commonly  believed  as  to  make  it 

S roper  to  refer  to  it  as  such,  seems  plain  from  the  passage  itself.  See 
[otes  on  the  passage. 

But  in  regard  to  the  objection  derived  from  this  fact,  it  may  be  re- 
marked : 

(«)  That  there  is  evidence  elsewhere  that  the  doctrine  ivas  known  as 
early  as  the  time  of  the  exile,  and  was  assumed  to  be  true  in  the  same  man- 
ner in  which  it  is  here.  Thus  in  Isa.  xxvi.  19,  it  is  referred  to  in  the 
same  manner,  for  the  remark  of  the  prophet  is  based  on  that,  and  cannot 
be  explained  except  on  the  supposition  that  this  Tvas  an  article  of  common 
belief.  See  Notes  on  that  passage.  See  also  Gesenius,  who  says,  "  that 
this  place  actually  contains  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
and  that  in  these  words  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  is  undoubtedly 
implied."  The  same  thing  seems  also  to  be  true  in  the  vision  of  the 
valley  of  dry  bones,  Ezekiel  xxxvii.  1 — 14.  Though  that  passage  does  not 
refer  primarily  to  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  is  not  intended 
directly  to  teach  it,  j'et  it  is  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  explain  it 
except  on  the  supposition  that  this  doctrine  was  understood,  and  was 
believed  to  be  true.  It  is  just  such  an  illustration  as  would  be  used 
now  in  a  community  where  that  doctrine  is  understood  and  believed. 

(b)  It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  in  the  passage  under  consideration, 
(Dan.  xii.  2,)  the  design  is  not  directly  to  teack  the  doctrine  of  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead,  but  that  it  refers,  as  the  primary  thought,  to  the 
restoration  and  recovery  of  the  Jewish  people,  as  if  they  were  raised 
from  the  dead ;  but  still,  as  in  the  passages  in  Isaiah  and  Ezekiel  above 
referred  to,  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  is  assumed,  and  the  illustration 
is  derived  from  that,  and,  as  Jerome  has  remarked  on  the  passage,  such  an 
illustration  would  not  be  employed  unless  the  doctrine  were  believed, 
for  "  no  one  would  attempt  to  confirm  an  uncertain  or  doubtful  thing  by 
that  which  had  no  existence."  But  the  same  design  exists  in  each  of 
the  cases,  in  Daniel,  Isaiah,  and  Ezekiel.  The  doctrine  is  alluded  to  in 
the  same  manner,  and  in  each  case  is  assumed  to  be  true  in  the  same 
way — as  a  doctrine  that  was  known,  and  that  might  be  employed  for  illus- 
tration. This  is  one  of  the  best  proofs  that  there  could  be  that  it  was  a 
common  article  of  belief ;  and  as  it  is  used  by  these  three  writers  in  the 
same  manner,  if  it  proves  that  one  of  them  lived  in  a  later  age,  it  proves 
the  same  of  all.  But  as  the  genuineness  of  that  portion  of  Isaiah  Avhere 
the  passage  occurs,  and  of  Ezekiel  is  not  called  in  question,  it  follows 
that  the  objection  has  no  force  as  alleged  against  the  genuineness  of 
Daniel. 

(f)  It  may  be  added,  that  on  the  supposition  that  there  is  no  allusion 
to  tliis  doctrine  in  any  of  the  prophets  that  lived  in  the  time  of  the  exile, 
or  before  it,  that  would  furnish  no  evidence  that  it  might  not  be  found 
in  a  bock  written  by  Daniel.  The  belief  undoubtedly  sprang  up  at  some 
time  among  the  Jews,  for  it  is  admitted  by  those  who  object  to  the  genu- 
ineness of  Daniel  on  this  account,  that  it  did  exist  in  the  time  in  which 


iXXII  INTRODUCTION. 

they  allege  that  the  book  was  'written — in  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiph 
anes  ;  and  it  undoul)tedIy  somehow  gained  so  much  currency  among  the 
Jews  as  to  lay  the  foundation  of  the  peculiar  belief  of  the  Pharisees  ou 
the  subject.  But  no  one  can  show  that  this  doctrine  could  not  have  had  its 
origin  in  Daniel  himself;  or  that  he,  living  in  the  time  of  the  exile,  might 
not  have  made  such  statements  on  the  subject,  as  to  lay  the  foundation 
for  the  general  belief  of  the  doctrine  in  later  times.  Even  on  the  sup- 
position that  he  was  not  inspired,  this  might  have  been ;  much  more  on 
the  supposition  that  he  toas  inspired — for  he  was  one  of  the  latest  of  the 
prophets  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  one  of  those  who  were  most  eminently 
favored  of  God.  In  itself  considered,  there  is  no  improbability  in  sup« 
posing  that  God  might  have  honoured  Daniel,  by  making  him  the  instru- 
ment of  first  distinctly  announcing  the  doctrines  of  the  resurrection  and 
the  future  judgment  of  the  world. 

C.  A  third  objection,  from  the  alleged  reference  to  later  customs  and 
opinions  in  the  book  of  Daniel,  is  derived  from  the  fixct  stated  in  ch. 
vi.  10,  that  Daniel  in  his  prayer  is  said  to  have  turned  his  face  towards 
Jerusalem.  This  objection,  as  urged  by  Bertholdt  and  others,  is,  that 
the  custom  of  turning  the  face  towards  Jerusalem  in  prayer,  was  one 
that  was  originated  after  the  building  of  the  second  temple,  and  that  no 
traces  of  it  are  found  while  the  first  temple  was  standing.  It  is  ad- 
mitted indeed  that  the  custom  of  turning  the  face  towards  a  temple  or 
place  of  worship  prevailed  extensively  in  Oriental  countries — as  among 
the  Mohammedans  at  present — but  it  is  alleged  that  this  had  its  origin 
among  the  Jews  afler  the  captivity,  and  after  the  second  temple  was 
built.  It  is  further  added  that  it  is  improbable  that  Daniel  would  turn 
his  face  towards  Jerusalem  on  that  occasion,  for  the  city  and  temple  were 
destroyed,  and  the  Shekinah,  the  symbol  of  the  Divine  presence  there, 
had  disappeared.     See  Bertholdt,  p.  30. 

To  this  objection,  the  following  remarks  may  be  made  in  reply: 

(1.)  The  custom  of  turning  the  face  in  worship  towards  a  temple  or 
shrine,  was  one  that  existed  early  in  the  world,  and  has  prevailed  in 
almost  all  countries.  It  is  one  that  would  naturally  spring  up  even  if 
there  were  no  positive  commands  on  the  subject,  for  this  would  seem  to 
be  demanded  by  respect  for  the  God  who  was  worshipped,  and  who  was 
supposed  to  have  his  residence  in  a  particular  temple.  If  Jehovah, 
therefore,  was  supposed  to  have  his  dwelling  in  the  temple ;  if  the  sym- 
bols of  his  presence  were  believed  to  bo  thei'e ;  if  that  was  his  house, 
just  in  proportion  as  that  was  believed  would  the  custom  be  likely  to 
prevail  of  turning  the  fiice  towards  that  place  in  worship — just  as  we 
now  naturally  turn  the  face  towards  heaven,  which  we  regard  as  the  pecu- 
liar place  of  his  abode.  It  would  have  been  unnatural,  therefore,  if 
Daniel  had  not  turned  his  face  towards  Jerusalem  in  his  devotions. 

(2.)  The  custom  is,  in  fact,  far-spread  in  the  East,  and  goes  back  in  its 
origin  beyond  any  period  we  can  now  assign  to  it.  It  prevails  everywhere 
among  the  Mohammedans ;  it  was  found  by  Mungo  Park  among  the 
negroes  in  Africa;  (Rosenmuller  Morgenland,  iv.  361,)  and  it  maybe 
said  to  be  the  general  custom  of  the  East.  No  one  can  determine  its 
origin,  and  probably,  for  the  reason  above  stated,  it  existed  in  the  first 
periods  of  the  history  of  the  world. 

(3.)  The  custom  is  mentioned  in  the   Psalms  as  existing  bejbrc  th<» 


INTRODUCTION.  XXXiIl 

time  of  Daniel.  Thus  in  Ps.  v.  7,  "  As  for  me,  I  -will  come  into  thy 
house  in  the  multitude  of  thy  mercy;  and  in  thy  fear  -will  I  worship 
toward  tliy  holy  temple."  Ps.  cxxxviii.  2,  "  I  -will  worship  toward  thy 
holy  temple,"  itc.  Comp.  Ps.  cxxi.  1.  So  Psalm  xxviii.  2,  "  Hear  the 
voice  of  my  supplication — when  I  lift  up  my  hands  toward  thy  holy 
oracle." 

(4.)  The  custom  was  sanctioned  by  what  Solomon  said  at  the  dedica- 
tion of  the  temple.  In  his  prayer  on  that  occasion,  it  is  implied  that  the 
custom  u-oiild  prevail,  and  what  was  said  at  that  time  could  not  but 
be  regarded  as  giving  a  sanction  to  it.  Thus  in  the  prayer  offered  at 
the  dedication  of  the  temple,  he  seems  to  have  supposed  just  such  a  case 
as  that  before  us  : — "  If  they  sin  against  thee,  and  thou  be  angry  with 
them,  and  deliver  them  to  the  enemy,  so  that  tliey  carry  them  away  cap- 
tive into  the  land  of  the  enemy,  far  or  near ;  if  they  shall  bethink 
themselves  in  the  land  whither  they  were  carried  captives,  and  repent, 
and  pray  unto  thee  toward  their  land  which  thou  gavcst  unto  their 
fathers,  the  city  which  thou  hast  chosen,  and  the  house  w.\ich  I  have 
built  for  thy  name,  then  hear  thou  their  prayer,"  &c.  1  Kings  viii.  44 — 
49.     Comp.  also  vs.  33,  35,  38,  44. 

(5.)  It  may  be  added  that  nothing  was  more  natural  than  for  Daniel 
to  do  this.  It  is  not  said  that  he  turned  his  foce  toward  the  "temple," 
but  toward  "  Jerusalem."  It  was  true  that  the  temple  was  in  ruins  ; 
true  that  the  ark  was  removed,  and  that  the  Shekinah  had  disappeared. 
It  was  true,  also,  that  Jerusalem  was  in  ruins.  But  it  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that  Jerusalem  had  been  long  regarded  as  the  city  of  God,  and  his 
dwelling-place  on  the  earth ;  that  this  was  the  place  where  his  worship 
had  been  celebrated  for  ages,  and  where  he  had  manifested  himself  by 
visible  symbols  ;  that  this  Avas  the  place  where  the  ancestors  of  Daniel 
had  lived  and  worshipped,  and  where  he  believed  the  temple  of  God 
Avould  be  built  again,  and  where  God  Avould  again  dwell — a  place  sacred 
in  the  recollection  of  the  past,  and  in  the  anticipations  of  the  future — a 
place  where  Daniel  had  himself  been  taught  to  worship  God  when  a 
child,  and  where  he  anticipated  that  they  who  should  be  delivered  from 
the  long  captivity  would  again  offer  sacrifice  and  praise  ;  and  nothing, 
therefore,  was  more  natural  than  for  him  in  his  j^rayer  to  turn  his  face  to 
a  spot  hallowed  by  so  many  sacred  associations. 

D.  A  fourth  objection  designed  to  show  that  the  bo  Nk  betrays  a  later 
origin  than  the  time  of  the  captivity  is,  that  Daniel  is  represented  (ch. 
vi.  10,)  as  entering  into  his  chamber,  or  "  upper  room" — vxepwof — when 
he  prayed,  and  that  the  custom  of  setting  apart  a  chamber  in  a  house  for 
'private  devotion,  sprang  up  in  a  later  ago  among  the  Jews,  as  one  of  th(? 
results  of  formalism  and  ostentation  in  religion.     Eertholdt,  p.  30. 

In  regard  to  this  custom  among  the  later  Jews,  see  thn  Notes  ou 
the  passage  referred  to.  But  there  are  two  remarks  to  be  made,  show- 
ling  conclusively  that  this  objection  has  no  force: 

[a)  There  is  no  evidence  that  it  was  such  an  "upper  room" — incpuci' — 
as  is  here  referred  to.  All  that  is  fairly  implied  in  the  word  in  thin 
ipassage — r^^hy^  might  be  applied  to  any  house,  and  at  any  time.  It 
j denotes,  indeed,  an  upper  room,  upper  story,  or  loft;  but  not  necessarily 
suck  an  upper  room  as  was  built  by  the  Jews  in  later  times,  and  desig- 
nated by  the  word  mep^oof.     It  is  not  improbable  that  Daniel  would  retire 


XXXIV  INTRODUCTION, 

to  such  a  part  of  liis  house  to  pray,  but  it  is  not  nectssarily  implied  in 
this  word  tliat  the  chamber  referred  to  had  been  specifically  constructed 
as  a  place  of  prayer. 

(b)  But  even  supposing  that  this  -was  the  case,  it  is  impossible  to 
prove  that  such  a  custom  may  not  have  prevailed  in  the  time  of  the  cap- 
tivity. "We  cannot  now  trace  the  origin  of  that  custom  among  the  Jews, 
and  though  it  undoubtedly  prevailed  in  a  later  age,  yet  no  one  can  de- 
monstrate that  it  did  not  exist  also  at  a  time  as  early  as  that  of  the  exile. 
Indeed,  there  is  some  evidence  that  it  did  prevail  at  an  earlier  period 
among  the  Hebrews.  Thus  in  2  Samuel  sviii.  33,  it  is  said  of  David  on 
the  death  of  Absalom,  "  And  the  king  was  much  moved,  and  went  up  to 
the  clumber  over  the  gaie,  and  wept,"  &c.  So  in  the  case  of  the  prophet 
Elijah,  during  his  residence  with  the  widow  of  Zarephath,  an  upper 
chamber  or  loft  was  assigned  the  prophet,  1  Kings  xvii.  19,  called  "  a 
loft  where  he  abode" — rvhy,  the  very  word  which  is  used  in  Daniel.  The 
same  word  occurs  again  in  Judges  iii.  20,  23,  24,  25,  in  such  case  ren- 
dered parlor,  and  referring  to  a  private  room  where  one  might  retire, 
and,  as  the  word  implies,  to  an  tipper  room — doubtless  a  small  room  built 
on  the  flat  roof  of  the  house,  as  being  more  retired  and  cool.  And  again, 
in  2  Kings  i.  2,  it  is  said  of  Ahaziah  that  "  he  fell  down  through  a  lat 
tice  in  his  npper  chamber  that  was  in  Samaria."  And  again  in  2  Kings 
iv.  10,  the  Shunamitcss  proposes  to  her  husband  to  make  for  the  prophet 

Elisha  "a  little  chamber  on  the  wall" iT ""c"?)!.     ^  place  of  retirement 

for  him.  These  passages  show  that  the  custom  of  constructing  a  cham- 
ber or  upper  room  for  the  purpose  of  retirement  or  devotion  prevailed 
long  before  the  time  of  Daniel,  and,  therefore,  the  fact  that  he  is  repre- 
sented as  having  such  a  place  in  his  house  in  Babylon,  if  that  be  the  fact 
referred  to  here,  cannot  be  alleged  as  evidence  that  the  book  was  written 
at  a  later  period  than  the  captivity. 

E.  It  is  alleged  as  an  evidence  that  the  book  was  written  at  a  period 
later  than  the  exile,  that  Daniel  is  represented  (in  the  same  passage,  ch. 
vi.  10,)  as  praying  three  times  a  day,  a  custom,  it  is  said,  which  origi- 
nated in  later  times. 

But  the  reply  to  this  is  obvious,  (a)  The  custom  of  praying  three 
times  a  day  in  sacred  devotion,  is  one  of  which  there  are  traces  in 
earlier  times.  Tlius  the  Psalmist,  Ps.  Iv.  17,  "  Evening,  and  morning, 
and  at  noon,  will  I  pi'ay  and  cry  aloud,  and  he  shall  hear  my  voice." 
(b)  Daniel  may  have  had  such  a  custom  without  supposing  that  he 
derived  it  from  any  one.  (c)  These  are  the  iiatural  times  of  prayer ; 
times  that  devout  persons  will  be  likcJjj  to  select  as  seasons  of  devotion  ; 
the  morning,  when  one  just  enters  upon  the  duties  and  trials  of  the  day — 
when  it  is  appropriate  to  give  thanks  for  preservation,  and  to  ask  of  God 
that  ho  will  guide,  direct  and  sustain  us;  the  evening,  when,  having 
finished  the  toils  of  the  day,  it  is  appropriate  to  render  thanksgiving, 
to  pray  for  the  remission  of  the  sins  of  the  day,  and  to  seek  the  blessing 
and  protection  of  God  as  we  lie  down  to  rest ;  and  noon,  when  we  feel 
the  propriety  of  dividing  the  labours  of  the  day  by  an  interval  of  rest 
and  devotion — thus  keeping  up,  amidst  the  cares  of  the  world,  the  lifo 
of  religion  in  tke  soul.  ((/)  There  is  no  certain  eviden  )e  that  this  be- 
came a  regular  and  settled  usage  in  later  times  among  the  Jews,  an;> 
more  than  that  it  was  of  a  former  age. 


INTROBUCTION.  XXXV 

F.  It  is  alleged  that  what  is  said  in  ch  iv.  27,  of  the  efficacy  of 
ahnsgiving  in  averting  the  judgments  of  God,  is  an  opinion  that  had  its 
origin  in  later  times,  and  proves  that  the  book  must  have  been  -written 
at  a  period  subsequent  to  the  captivity.  The  passage  is,  "  Let  my  coun- 
sel be  acceptable  unto  thee,  and  brake  off  thy  sins  by  righteousness,  and 
thine  iniquities  by  showing  mercy  to  the  iMor ;  it  may  be  a  lengthening  of 
thy  tranquillity.''  This,  it  is  said,  could  have  been  ■written  only  at  a 
time  when  great  merit  was  attributed  to  almsgiving,  and  when  such 
acts,  it  was  supposed,  would  avert  divine  vengeance  from  the  guilty ; 
and  this  opinion,  it  is  alleged,  sprang  up  at  a  period  subsequent  to  the  cap- 
tivity. That  the  sentiment  here  adverted  to  prevailed  in  later  times, 
there  can  be  no  doubt;  but  there  is  no  proof  that  it  is  used  in  the  pas- 
sage before  us  in  the  sense  in  which  it  prevailed  in  the  time  when  the 
books  of  the  Apocrypha  were  written.  And,  in  reference  to  the  objec- 
tion here  urged,  all  that  is  necessary,  it  seems  to  me,  is  to  refer  to  the 
Notes  on  the  passage,  where  its  true  meaning  is  fully  considered.  The 
short  answer  is,  that  the  passage  does  not  teach  any  such  peculiar  doc- 
trine on  the  subject  of  almsgiving  as  prevailed  in  later  times  among  the 
Jews,  but  only  the  general  doctrine,  which  is  found  everywhere  in  the 
Bible,  and  which  accords  with  all  just  notions  on  the  subject,  that  if  a 
sinner  will  abandon  the  error  of  his  ways,  and  perform  acts  of  righteous- 
ness, it  will  conduce  to  his  happiness,  and  in  all  probability  to  the  length- 
ening out  of  his  days. 

G.  One  other  objection,  under  the  general  head  now  under  considera- 
tion, remains.  It  is  derived  from  what  are  called  the  ascetic  customs  re- 
ferred to  in  the  book.  On  this  point  De  AVette  refers  to  ch.  i.  8 — 16,  as 
compared  with  2  Mace.  v.  27,  and  with  the  Apocryphal  portion  of  the 
Book  of  Esther. 

In  regard  to  this  objection,  also,  perhaps  all  that  is  necessary  is  to 
refer  to  the  Notes  on  the  passage.  The  reason  which  Daniel  gave  for 
not  partaking  of  the  food  and  wine  furnished  by  the  king  of  Babylon,  is 
not  such  as  would  be  derived  from  any  ascetic  or  monastic  opinions,  but 
such  as  would  be  given  by  any  Jew  of  that  age  who  was  conscientious. 
It  was  "  that  he  might  not  dehle  himself  with  the  portion  of  the  king's 
meat,  nor  with  the  wine  which  he  drank"  (ch.  i.  8)  ;  that  is,  he  pur- 
posed to  keep  himself  clear  from  all  participation  in  idolatry,  and  to 
save  himself  from  the  temptations  to  which  one  would  be  exposed  if  he 
indulged  freely  in  the  luxuries  in  eating  and  drinking  which  were  prac- 
tised at  the  royal  table.  As  this  solution  explains  the  passage  on  prin- 
ciples that  would  be  like  to  influence  a  pious  Jew,  and  which  would  be 
proper  in  young  men  everywhere,  it  is  unnecessary  to  seek  any  other, 
and  improper  to  suppose  that  there  is  an  allusion  here  to  superstitioua 
customs  which  prevailed  among  the  Jews  in  later  times. 

VI.  A  sixth  objection  to  the  authenticity  and  genuinene&a  of  the  Book, 
is  derived  from  the  place  assigned  it  in  the  canon.  This  objection  is 
urged  by  Bertholdt,  Bleek,  Eichhorn,  Kirras,  and  De  Wette,  and  is  sub- 
stantially this,  as  stated  by  Bertholdt.  It  is  well  known  that  the  Jews, 
in  the  time  when  the  Talmud  Avas  composed,  divided  their  sacred  books 
into  three  parts — the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Hagiography.  The 
latter  class  embraced  the  Psalms,  Job,  Proverbs,  Song  of  Solomon,  JHuiii, 
Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes,  Esther,  Daniel,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  the  two 


XXXVI  INTRODUCTION. 

books  of  the  Chronicles.  This  classification  also  existed  in  the  time  of 
Jerome,  who  obtained  it  evidently  from  the  Jews  in  Palestine.  The 
objection  is,  that  in  collecting  and  arranging  the  books  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, Daniel  was  assigned  to  this  latter  class,  and  was  not  placed 
among  the  Prophets.  The  book  professes  to  be,  in  a  great  part,  pro- 
phetical, and  if  genuine,  its  true  place,  it  is  argued,  would  be  among  the 
prophets  ;  and,  it  is  said,  it  would  have  been  placed  in  that  class  if  it  had 
been  in  existence  at  th  ?,  time  when  the  collection  of  the  sacred  books 
was  made.  It  is  argued,  therefore,  that  it  must  have  had  a  later  origin, 
and  that  when  it  was  written  it  was  assigned  a  place  in  that  general  col- 
lection of  writings  where  all  those  books  were  arranged  which  could  not 
be  placed  with  either  of  the  other  classes.  This  objection  is  summarily 
stated  by  Prof.  Stuart  (Critical  History  and  Defence  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Canon,  p.  26C.)  in  the  following  words :  "  The  argument  runs 
thus :  '  No  reason  can  be  assigned,  except  the  lateness  of  the  composi- 
tion, why  Daniel  and  the  Chronicles  should  be  placed  among  the  Kethu- 
bim  or  Hagiography,  since  the  first  belongs  to  the  class  of  the  later  pro- 
phets, and  the  second,  like  Samuel,  Kings,  etc.,  to  the  class  of  the  former 
prophets.  The  fact,  then,  that  Daniel  and  the  Chronicles  are  joined  with 
the  Kethubim,  shows  that  they  were  written  after  the  second  class  of 
the  scriptural  books,  viz.  the  Prophets,  was  fully  defined  and  completed. 
Now,  as  this  class  comprises  Ilaggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi,  so  we 
have  conclusive  evidence  that  Daniel  and  Chronicles  must  have  been 
composed,  or  at  all  events  introduced  into  the  canon,  at  a  period  sub- 
sequent to  Nehemiah  and  Malachi,  which  was  about  430 — 420,  B.  C  " 

In  reference  to  this  objection,  perhaps  all  that  would  be  necessary  for 
me  would  be  to  refer  to  the  very  full  and  satisfactory  argument  of  Prof. 
Stuart  on  the  Canon  in  the  work  just  named,  ^  9 — 13,  pp.  214 — 298.  A 
few  remarks,  however,  on  two  or  three  points,  seem  to  be  demanded  to 
show  the  results  which  have  been  searched  by  a  careful  investigation  of 
the  subject,  and  how  entirely  without  foundation  is  the  objection. 

A.  The  objection,  then,  takes  for  granted  the  following  things,  which 
it  is  impossible  now  to  prove  :  (1.)  That  the  division  of  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  found  in  the  Talmud,  and  prevailing  among  the  Jews  in 
the  time  of  Jerome,  in  which  Daniel  is  placed  in  the  third  class,  the 
Kethubim  or  Hagiography,  is  the  ancient  and  original  division ;  for  if 
this  is  not  so,  then  Daniel  may  have  been  placed  among  the  prophets, 
and  of  course  the  objection  would  not  then  exist.  There  is  the  strongest 
reason  to  believe  that  this  was  7iot  the  arrangement  that  prevailed  at  an 
earlier  period,  but  that  it  was  made  long  after  the  time  of  Josephus, 
At  any  rate  it  cannot  be  proved  to  have  been  the  original  arrangement. 
(2.)  It  takes  for  granted  that  the  main  reason  for  inserting  Daniel  and 
the  books  of  the  Chronicles  in  the  Hagiography  was  the  recent  origin  of 
these  books,  or  the  fact  that  they  were  composed  after  the  second  class — 
the  prophets — was  completed  and  collected  together;  for  the  whola 
weight  of  the  objection  rests  on  this.  If  any  of  these  books  in  the  Hagi- 
ography were  in  fact  written  at  an  earlier  period  than  some  in  the  second 
class — the  Prophets,  or  if  any  other  reason  existed  for  referring  them  to 
the  clase  of  the  Ilagiograghy  than  the  lateness  of  their  composition,  then 
the  objection  would  have  no  force.  But  this  difficulty  of  itself  would  be 
"atal  to  the  objection,  for  there  is  every  reason  to  suppose  that  the  iate- 


INTRODUCTION.  XXXVH 

uess  o{  the  composition  was  not  the  reason  why  these  books  were  placed 
in  the  Hagiography,  and  that  this  was  never  supposed  or  implied  hy  those 
who  made  the  arrangement.  For,  not  to  speak  of  the  Book  of  Joli,  which 
is  found  in  that  class,  and  which  is  probably  one  of  the  oldest  compo- 
sitions in  the  Bible,  if  not  the  very  oldest,  what  shall  wo  say  of  the 
Psalms,  and  the  Book  of  Proverbs,  and  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes,  and  the 
Canticles,  which  are  also  found  in  that  class?  Assuredly  it  could  not 
have  been  pretended  that  those  writings  belonged  to  the  Maccabcan  age, 
and  that  they  wore  inserted  in  the  Hagiography  because  they  were  sup- 
posed to  have  had  a  later  origin  than  the  Prophets  ;  for,  in  all  ages,  the 
Jews  have  regarded  the  Book  of  Proverbs,  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes,  and 
the  Canticles,  as  the  genuine  j^roduction  of  Solomon.  Why  then  were 
they  put  into  the  Hagiography  —  for  there  the  Psalms,  and  the  Book  of 
Proverbs,  and  Ecclesiastes,  and  the  Song  of  Solomon,  have  always  been, 
in  every  triplex  division  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  which  has 
ever  been  made?  (3.)  The  objection  takes  for  granted  that  the  two 
classes,  the  Prophets  and  the  Hagiography,  have  been  fixed  and  uniform, 
like  the  first,  the  Law,  as  to  the  number  of  books,  in  each  ever  since  the 
division  was  made  ;  that  the  same  number  of  books,  and  the  same  arrange- 
ment, has  been  found  which  existed  in  the  time  of  Josephus ;  and  that  no 
causes  have  ever  operated  since  to  produce  a  change  in  the  arrangement ; 
for  if  this  is  not  so  it  would  be  fatal  to  the  objection.  But  this  can  never 
be  shown  to  be  true.  Indeed,  there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  the 
contrary  is  true,  and  if  it  cannot  be  demonstrated  to  be  true,  the  objec- 
tion is  without  force.     But, 

B.  There  are  strong  positive  arguments  to  show  that  the  fact  that 
Daniel,  in  the  later  divisions  of  the  Hebrew  books,  is  placed  in  the  list  of 
the  Hagiography  or  Kethubim,  is  no  argument  against  the  genuineness 
and  authenticity  of  the  book. 

(1.)  There  is  every  presumption  that  in  the  earliest  arrangement  of 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  book  of  Daniel,  with  several  that 
now  occupy  the  same  place  in  the  Talmudical  arrangement,  was  ranked 
with  the  second  class  —  the  Prophets.  This  presumption  is  founded, 
mainly,  on  what  is  said  of  the  division  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment by  Josephus.  It  is  true  that  he  has  not  enumerated  the  books  of 
the  Old  Testament,  but  he  has  mentioned  the  division  of  the  books  in  his 
time,  and,  of  course,  in  earlier  times,  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  it  morally 
certain  that  Daniel  was  not  in  the  third  class,  but  in  the  second  class  — 
the  Prophets.  His  account  of  this  division  (Against  Apion,  b.  1,  I  8)  is 
as  follows :  "  We  have  not  a  countless  number  of  books,  discordant  and 
arranged  against  each  other,  but  only  two  and  twenty  books,  containing  the 
history  of  every  age,  which  are  justly  accredited  as  divine  [the  old  editions 
of  Josephus  read  merely,  'which  are  justly  accredited' — '^tla  (divine) 
comes  from  Eusebius'  translation  of  Josephus,  in  Ecc.  Hist.  iii.  10] ;  and  of 
these  five  belong  to  Moses,  which  contain  both  the  laws  and  the  history 
of  the  generations  of  men  until  his  death.  This  period  lacks  but  little  of 
3000  years.  From  the  death  of  Moses,  moreover,  until  the  reign  of 
Artaxerxes,  king  of  the  Persians  after  Xerxes,  the  prophets  who  fol- 
lowed Moses  have  described  the  things  which  were  done  during  the  age 
of  each  one  respectively,  in  thirteen  books.  The  remaining  four  contain 
hymns  to  God  and  rules  of  life  for  men.  From  the  time  of  Artaxerxes, 
4 


XXXVin  INTRODUCTION. 

moreover,  till  our  present  period,  all  occurrences  have  been  written  down ; 
but  they  are  not  regarded  as  entitled  to  the  like  credit  -with  those  which 
precede  them,  because  there  was  no  certain  succession  of  prophets.  Fact 
has  shown  what  confidence  we  place  in  our  own  writings.  For  although  so 
many  ages  have  passed  away,  no  one  has  dared  to  add  to  them,  nor  to 
take  anything  fr:)m  them,  nor  to  make  alterations.  In  all  Jews  it  is  im- 
planted, even  from  their  birth,  to  regard  them  as  being  the  instructions 
of  God,  and  to  abide  steadfastly  by  them,  and  if  it  be  necessary  to  die 
gladly  for  them."     Prof.  Stuart's  translation,  ut  supra,  pp.  430,  431. 

Now,  in  this  extract  from  Josephus,  stating  the  number  and  order  of 
the  sacred  books  in  his  time,  it  is  necessarily  implied  that  the  Book  of 
Daniel  was  then  included  in  the  second  part,  or  among  the  "  Prophets." 
For  (a)  it  is  clear  that  it  was  not  in  the  third  division,  or  the  Hagiog- 
raphy.  Of  that  division  Josephus  says,  "  The  remaining  four  contain 
hymns  to  God,  and  rules  of  life  for  men."  Now  we  are  not  able  to 
determine  with  exact  certainty,  indeed,  what  these  four  books  were,  for 
Josephus  has  not  mentioned  their  names,  but  we  can  determine  with 
certainty  that  Daniel  was  not  of  the  number,  for  liis  book  does  not  come 
under  the  description  of  "  hymns  to  God,"  or  "  rules  of  life  for  men."  If 
we  cannot,  therefore,  make  out  what  these  books  were,  the  argument 
would  be  complete  on  that  point;  but  although  Josephus  has  not 
enumerated  them,  they  can  be  made  out  with  a  good  degree  of  proba- 
bility. That  the  "  hymns  to  God"  would  embrace  the  Psalms  there  can 
be  no  doubt ;  and  there  can  be  as  little  doubt  that  in  the  books  contain- 
ing "  rules  of  life  for  men,"  the  Proverbs  would  be  included.  The  other 
books  that  would  more  properly  come  under  this  designation  than  any 
other,  are  Ecclesiastes  and  the  Song  of  Solomon,  (see  the  full  evidence  of 
this  in  Prof.  Stuart,  ut  supra,  pp.  256-2G4) ;  at  all  events  it  is  clear  that 
Daniel  would  not  be  included  in  that  number,  {b)  There  is  evidence, 
then,  that  Daniel  u-as  included  at  that  time  in  the  second  division  —  that 
of  the  Prophets.  Josephus  says  that  that  division  comprised  "  thirteen 
books,"  and  that  Daniel  was  included  among  them  is  evident  from  the 
rank  which  Josephus  gives  to  him  as  one  of  the  greatest  of  tho  prophets. 
Thus  he  says  of  him  (Ant.  b.  x.  ch.  xi.),  "He  was  so  happy  as  to  have 
strange  revelations  made  to  him,  and  those  as  to  one  of  the  greatest  of 
the  prophets ;  insomuch  that  while  he  was  alive  he  had  the  esteem  and 
applause  both  of  kings  and  of  the  multitude ;  and  now  he  is  dead  he 
retains  a  remembrance  that  will  never  fail.  For  the  several  books  that 
he  wrote  and  left  behind  him  are  still  read  by  us  till  this  time,  and  from 
them  we  believe  that  he  conversed  with  God ;  for  he  not  only  prophesied 
of  future  events,  as  did  the  other  prophets,  but  he  also  determined  the 
time  of  their  accomplishment.  And  while  prophets  used  to  foretell  mis- 
fortunes, and  on  that  account  were  disagreeable  both  to  the  kings  and 
the  multitude,  Daniel  was  to  them  a  prophet  of  good  things,  and  this  to 
such  a  degree,  that,  by  the  agreeable  nature  of  his  predictions,  he  pro- 
cured the  good-will  of  all  men ;  and  by  the  accomplishment  of  them  he 
procured  the  belief  of  their  truth,  and  the  opinion  of  a  sort  of  divinity 
for  himself  among  the  multitude.  He  also  wrote  and  left  behind  him 
what  evinced  the  accuracy,  and  an  undeniable  veracity  of,  his  predictions." 
From  this  it  is  clear  that  Josephus  regarded  Daniel  as  worthy  to  be 
ranked  among  the  greatest  of  the  prophets,  and  that  he  considered  his 


INTK0L»€0T10N.  XXXIX 

irritings  as  ■worthy  to  be  classed  -with  those  of  the  other  eminent  prophets 
'j{  bis  country.  This  is  such  hmguagc  as  would  bo  used  in  spoakhig  ol 
xni/  ancient  prophet ;  and,  as  -vve  have  seen  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  could 
net  have  been  of  the  number  mentioned  by  him  in  the  third  class — 
"thoec  containing  hymns  to  God  and  rules  of  life  for  men" — it  follows 
that  it  must  have  been  ranked  by  Josephus  in  the  second  division — that 
of  the  prophets.  It  does  not  seem  easy  to  suppose  that  there  could  be 
clearer  proof  than  this,  short  of  direct  af&rmation.  The  proof  that  ho 
regarded  Daniel  as  belonging  to  this  division  of  the  books,  is  as  clear  as 
can  be  made  out  from  his  writings  in  favor  of  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  or 
Eze'kiel. 

(2.)  If  Daniel  had  this  rank  in  the  time  of  Josephus,  then  it  would 
follow  that  in  the  division  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  referred 
to  by  the  Saviour  (Luke  xxiv.  44),  he  must  have  had  this  rank  also. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Josephus  expresses  not  his  own  private 
judgment  in  the  matter,  but  the  prevailing  opinion  of  his  countrymen  on 
the  subject.  Josephus  was  born  A.  D.  37.  and  consequently  he  must 
have  uttered  what  was  the  general  sentiment  in  the  time  of  the  Saviour 
and  the  apostles — for  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  any  change  had  occurred 
in  that  short  time  among  the  Jews,  by  which  Daniel  had  been  transferred 
from  the  third  division  to  the  second.  If  any  change  had  occurred  in  the 
arrangement  of  the  books,  it  would  have  been,  for  reasons  which  are  ob- 
vious, just  the  reverse — since  the  predictions  of  Daniel  were  at  this  time 
much  relied  on  by  Christians,  in  their  arguments  against  the  Jews,  to 
prove  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah.  We  may  regard  it  as  morally  cer- 
tain, therefore,  that  in  the  time  of  the  Saviour,  Daniel  was  ranked  among 
the  prophets.  It  may  be  added  here,  also,  that  if  Daniel  had  this  rank 
in  the  estimation  of  Josephus,  it  may  be  presumed  that  he  had  the  same 
rank  when  the  division  of  the  sacred  books  is  referred  to  in  the  only 
other  two  instances  among  the  Jews,  previous  to  the  composition  of  the 
Talmud.  In  both  these  cases  there  is  mention  of  the  triplex  division  ;  in 
neither  are  the  names  of  the  books  recorded.  One  occurs  in  the  "  Pro- 
logue of  the  Wisdom  of  Jesus,  the  Son  of  Sirach,"  in  the  Apocrj'pha. 
This  Prologue  was  probably  written  about  130  B.  C.  ;  the  book  itself 
probably  about  180  B.  C.  In  this  Prologue  the  writer  mentions  the 
divisions  of  the  sacred  books  three  times  in  this  manner :  "  Since  so  many 
and  important  things  have  been  imparted  to  us  by  the  Law,  the  Prophets, 
and  other  [?ro?-As]  of  the  like  kind  which  have  followed,  for  which  one 
must  needs  praise  Isi'ael  on  account  of  learning  and  wisdom  ;  and  inas- 
much as  not  only  those  who  read  ought  to  bo  well-informed,  but  those 
who  are  devoted  to  learning,  should  be  able  to  profit,  both  in  the  way  of 
speaking  and  writing,  such  as  are  foreigners,  my  grandfather,  Jesus, 
having  devoted  himself  very  much  to  the  reading  of  the  Laic,  the  Prophets, 
and  the  other  books  of  his  country,  and  having  acquired  a  great  degree  of 
experience  in  these  things,  was  himself  led  on  to  compose  something  per- 
taining to  instruction  and  wisdom,  so  that  those  desirous  of  learning, 
being  in  possession  of  these  things,  might  grow  much  more  by  a  life  con- 
formed to  the  law.  Ye  are  invited,  therefore,  with  good  will,  and  strict 
attention,  to  make  the  perusal,  and  to  take  notice  whenever  we  may  seem 
to  lack  ability,  in  respect  to  any  of  the  words  which  we  have  labored  to 
translate.     Not  only  so,  but  the  Law  itself,  and  the  Prophets,  and  the  re- 


XL  INTRODUCTION. 

maining  hooks,  exhibit  no  small  diversity  among  themselves  as  to  th» 
modes  of  expression." 

The  other  reference  of  the  same  kind  occurs  in  Philo  Judoeus.  IIo 
flourished  about  A.  1).  40,  and  in  praising  a  contemplative  life,  and  giving 
examples  of  it,  he  comes  at  last  to  the  Therapevtce,  or  Essenes,  and  in 
speaking  of  their  devotional  practices,  he  uses  this  language:  "  In  every 
house  is  a  sanctuary,  which  is  called  sacred  place  or  monasteri/,  in  which, 
being  alone,  they  perform  the  mysteries  of  a  holy  life;  introducing 
nothing  into  it,  neither  drink,  nor  liread-corn,  nor  any  of  the  other  tilings 
which  are  necessary  for  the  wants  of  the  body,  but  the  Laws,  and,  Ova- 
cles  predicted  by  the  prophets,  and  Hymns  and  other  xcriiings,  by  which 
knowledge  and  p>icty  are  increased  and  perfected."  There  can  be  no 
reasonable  doubt  that  precisely  the  same  division  of  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  is  referred  to  in  each  of  these  cases  which  is  mentioned  by 
Josephus.  If  so,  then  Daniel  was  at  that  time  reckoned  among  the 
Prophets. 

(3.)  He  certainly  had  this  rank  among  the  early  Christians,  alike  in 
their  estimation  of  him,  and  in  the  order  of  the  sacred  books.  It  happens, 
that  although  Josephus,  the  son  of  Sirach,  and  Philo  have  given  no 
list  of  the  names  and  order  of  the  sacred  books,  yet  the  early  Christians 
have,  and  from  these  lists  it  is  easy  to  ascertain  the  rank  which  they 
assigned  to  Daniel.  "  Melito  places  Daniel  among  the  Prophets,  and 
before  Ezekiel.  The  same  does  Origen.  The  Council  of  Laodicea  places 
Daniel  next  after  Ezekiel,  and,  of  course,  among  the  Prophets.  The 
same  do  the  Canones  Apostol.,  Cyrill  of  Jerusalem,  Gregory  Nazianzen, 
Athanasius,  Synopsis  Scriptur^e  in  Athan.  The  Council  of  Hippo,  like 
Melito  and  Origen,  place  it  before  Ezekiel,  as  also  does  Hilary ;  and 
Rufinus  places  it  next  after  Ezekiel.  Jerome  alone,  in  giving  an 
account  of  the  Rabbinical  usage  in  his  day,  puts  Daniel  among  the 
Hagiography ;  and  after  it  he  puts  Chronicles,  Ezra  (with  Nehemiah) 
and  Esther."  Prof.  Stuart,  ut  supra,  p.  284.*  The  Talmud  thus  stands 
alone,  with  the  exception  of  Jerome,  in  placing  Daniel  among  the  hooka 
constituting  the  Hagiography ;  and  Jerome,  in  doing  this,  merely  gives 
an  account  of  what  was  customary  in  his  time  among  the  Jewish 
Rabbins,  without  expressing  any  opinion  of  his  own  on  the  subject. 
These  testimonies  are  sufficient  to  show  that  Daniel  was  never  placed  in 
the  division  composing  the  Hagiography,  so  far  as  can  be  proved  by  the 
Son  of  Sirach,  by  Philo,  by  Josephus,  by  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  the 
Saviour,  or  by  the  Christian  writers  of  the  first  four  centuries  ;  and,  of 
course,  until  it  can  be  demonstrated  that  he  teas  thus  classified,  this  ob' 
jection  must  fall  to  the  ground.     But, 

(4.)  The  fact  that  Daniel  occupied  this  place  in  the  divisions  made  of 
the  books  by  the  later  Jews,  can  be  accounted  for  in  a  way  perfectly  con 
sistent  with  the  supposition  that  he  wrote  at  the  time  when  the  book  ia 
commonly  believed  to  have  been  composed.     For, 

(a)  The  reason  which  they  themselves  give  for  this  arrangement  is, 
not  that  his  writings  were  of  later  date,  but  some  fanciful  view  which 
they  had  about  the  degrees  of  inspiration  of  the  prophets.  They  say  that 
the  Books  of  Moses  take  the  precedence  above  all  others,  because  God 

*  The  lists  of  the  hooks,  as  given  by  these  ■writers  and  councils,  may  he  seen  at  length  la 
Prof.  Stuart,  ut  supra,  Appendix,  pp.  431-452. 


INTRODUCTION.  XLl 

spake  -with  him  mouth  to  mouth ;  that  the  prophets  who  came  after  him, 
were  such  as,  whether  sleeping  or  waking  when  they  received  revelations, 
were  deprived  of  all  the  use  of  their  senses,  and  were  spoken  to  Ijy  a 
voice,  or  saw  prophetic  visions  in  ecstacy ;  and  that  the  third  and  lowest 
class  of  writers  were  those  who,  preserving  the  use  of  their  senses,  spaiso 
like  other  men,  and  yet  in  such  a  way  that,  although  not  favoured  with 
dreams  or  visions  in  ecstacy,  they  still  perceived  a  divine  influence  resting 
upon  them,  at  whose  suggestion  they  spake  or  wrote  what  they  madt 
public.  For  the  proof  of  this,  see  Prof.  Stuart,  ut  supra,  p.  260.  Agree- 
ably to  this  fanciful  opinion,  they  made  the  arrangements  of  the  sacred 
books  which  is  found  in  the  Talmud,  and  on  this  principle  they  placed 
Daniel  in  the  list  of  the  Ilagiography.  But  assuredly  this  fanciful 
opinion,  and  the  mistake  of  the  Jews  consequent  on  it,  can  be  no  reason 
for  supposing  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  was  written  in  the  time  of  the 
Maccabees ;  and  especially  as  they  who  made  this  arrangement  never 
pretended  this,  and  never  could  have  made  the  arrangement  on  this 
ground.     And, 

(h)  There  is  great  reason  for  supposing,  after  all,  that  Daniel  was  not 
assigned  to  the  place  which  he  has  in  the  Talmudic  divisions  of  the  sacred 
books,  on  the  ground  that  he  was  properly  classed  there,  even  on  their 
arbitrary  and  fanciful  opinion  as  to  the  degrees  of  inspiration  among  the 
prophets,  but  because,  in  the  disputes  between  Christians  and  Jews 
about  the  Messiah,  in  the  first  three  and  a  half  centuries,  the  Jews  felt 
themselves  to  be  so  pressed  by  the  prediction  in  Dan.  ix.  respecting  the 
seventy  weeks,  that  they  sought  to  give  the  book  a  lower  place  than  it 
had  occupied  before,  and  thus  to  remove  it  somewhat  from  an  association 
with  the  other  prophets,  and  to  diminish  the  force  of  the  argument  in 
proof  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  the  Christ. 

(5.)  To  all  this  it  may  be  added,  that  it  would  have  been  impossible  to 
have  foisted  a  book  into  the  canon  that  was  composed  in  the  time  of  the 
Maccabees,  and  that  was  not  regarded  as  of  divine  inspiration.  We  have, 
as  above,  the  express  testimony  of  Josephus,  that  for  some  four  hundred 
years  before  his  time  they  had  no  prophets  who  wrote  inspired  books,  or 
who  could  be  regarded  as  sacred  writers.  The  canon,  according  to  him, 
was  closed  at  the  time  of  Artaxerxes,  and  afterward  they  had  books  in 
which  "  all  occurrenoes  were  written  down,  but  these  were  not  regarded 
as  of  like  credit  with  those  that  preceded  them,  because  there  was  no 
certain  succession  of  prophets."  That  is,  the  canon  of  inspired  books 
was  then  closed,  in  the  apprehension  of  the  Jews,  or  they  had  a  definite 
number  which  they  regarded  as  of  divine  origin,  and  as  distinguished 
;  from  all  others. 

Now,  supposing  this  to  have  been,  as  no  doubt  it  was,  a  prevailing 

opinion  among  the  Jews,  it  would  have  been  impossible  to  have  foisted 

in  a  book  written  in   the  time   of  the  Maccabees  —  or  after  the  time  of 

Antiochus  Epiphanes,  as  the  objection  supposes  the  Book  of  Daniel  to 

have  been  —  in  such  a  way  that  it  would  be  regarded  as  entitled  to  a 

place  among  the   sacred  writings.     If  this  book  was  written   at  that 

,  time,  it  must  have  been  known  that  it  was  not  the  genuine  production  of 

;  the  Daniel  of  the  captivity,  and  by  whom  could  it  be  introduced  into  tho 

canon  ?     On  what  pretence  could  it  be  done  ?     What  claim  could  have 

been  urged  for  a  spurious  book  of  this  kind  to  a  place  by  the  side  of 

4* 


XLn  INTRODUCTION. 

Isaiah  and  Ezekiel?  It  is  ■well  known  that  the  Hebrews  have  been,  in  o-Ti 
ages,  most  careful  of  their  sacred  books  ;  that  they  have  transcribed 
them  with  the  greatest  possible  attention  ;  that  they  have  counted  the 
words  and  the  letters ;  that  they  have  marked  and  preserved  every 
variety,  irregularity,  and  anomaly,  even  every  unusual  shape  and 
position  of  a  letter  in  the  manuscript;  and  it  may  be  asked  with  em« 
phasis,  in  what  way  it  would  be  possible  to  introduce  a  book  which  wa?» ; 
known  and  admitted  to  be  spurious, —  a  book  falsely  ascribed  to  one  w^ho 
was  said  to  have  lived  long  before — among  those  which  they  regarded  as 
of  divine  origin,  and  whose  purity  they  guarded  with  so  much  care? 
Scarcely  any  greater  literary  absurdity  can  be  imagined  than  this. 

VII.  A  seventh  objection  which  has  been  urged  to  the  genuineness  of 
the  Book  of  Daniel,  is  derived  from  the  silence  of  the  Son  of  Sirach  in 
regard  to  it.  This  objection  is  urged  by  De  Wette,  Bleek,  Eichhorn, 
Kirms,  and  Bretschneider,  and  is  substantially  this:  —  that  in  the  Book 
of  Ecclesiasticus  (ch.  xlix.),  the  author  of  that  book,  Jesus,  the  Son 
of  Sirach,  undertakes  to  give  a  list  of  the  personages  in  the  Jewish 
history  who  had  been  eminent  for  virtue,  piety,  and  patriotism ; 
and  that  the  circumstances  of  the  case  are  such  that  it  is  to  be  pre* 
sumcd  that  if  he  had  known  anything  of  Daniel  and  his  writings,  hd 
Avould  have  been  mentioned  among  them.  Thus  he  mentions  David, 
Hezekiah,  Josiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  the  Twelve  Prophets,  Zorobabel, 
Jesus  the  son  of  Josedec,  Nehemiah,  Enoch,  Joseph,  Shem,  Seth,  and 
Adam.  The  particular  point,  however,  of  the  objection  seems  to  be,  tiiat 
he  mentions  men  who  were  eminent  in  securing  the  return  of  the  He- 
brews to  their  own  country,  as  Nehemiah  and  Zorobabel,  and  that  if 
Daniel  had  lived  then  in  Babylon,  and  had  had  the  important  agency  in 
effecting  the  return  of  the  captives  which  is  ascribed  to  him  in  this  book, 
or  had  had  the  influence  at  the  court  of  Persia  attributed  to  him,  it  is  un- 
accountable that  his  name  was  not  mentioned. 

To  this  objection  we  may  reply:  (1.)  That  the  argiimentiim  a  silentio 
is  admitted  not  to  be  a  conclusive  kind  of  reasoning.  So  long  as  there 
maij  have  been  other  reasons  why  the  name  was  omitted  in  such  a  list,  it 
is  unfair  and  inconclusive  to  infer  that  he  had  not  then  an  existence,  or 
that  there  was  no  such  man.  It  is  necessary,  in  order  that  this  reason- 
ing should  have  any  force,  to  show  that  this  is  the  onhj  cause  which 
could  have  led  to  this  omission,  or  tliat  this  alone  could  account  for  it. 
But  it  is  easy  to  conceive  that  there  may  have  been  many  reasons  why 
the  name  was  omitted  in  this  rapid  enumeration,  consistently  with 
the  belief  that  Daniel  then  lived  in  Babylon,  and  that  he  occupied 
the  position,  and  rendered  the  services,  which  it  may  be  supposed 
from  the  account  in  this  book,  he  would  render.  In  such  a  rapid 
enumeration  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  the  writer  mentioned  all  the 
eminent  men  among  the  Hebrews,  and  therefore  it  is  in  no  way  remark- 
able that  the  name  of  Daniel  should  have  been  omitted.  This  is  con- 
ceded even  by  Kirms.  See  his  work,  Commentatio  Ilistorico-Critica,  &c., 
p.  9.  (2.)  The  objection,  if  of  any  value,  would  prove  that  no  such 
person  as  Daniel  existed  at  that  time,  or  even  at  any  time  previous  to 
the  age  of  the  Son  of  Sirach  ;  for  he  did  not  mention  these  persons  as 
authors  of  books,  but  as  eminent  persons — as  distinguished  not  by  their 
writings^  but  by  their  lives.    But  the  existence  of  Daniel,  as  a  historical 


INTRODUCTION.  XLlTi 

personage,  is  as  clear  as  that  of  any  of  the  eminent  men  mentioned  in 
the  Jewish  history,  and  is  even  conceded  by  the  objectors  thcmselvog 
See  §  1  of  this  Introduction.  (3.)  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Son  of  Sirach 
has  omitted  the  names  of  others  vrhom  lie  would  be  at  least  as  likely  to 
refer  to  as  the  name  of  Daniel.  lie  has  Avholly  omitted  the  name  of 
E^ra.  Would  not  his  agency  be  as  likely  to  occur  to  such  a  A\riter  as 
that  of  Daniel?  lie  has  omitted  the  names  of  Mordecai  and  Esther — 
personages  Avhose  agency  would  be  as  likely  to  be  remembered  in 
guch  a  connection  as  that  of  Daniel.  lie  has  omitted  also  the  whole 
of  the  Minor  Prophets  ;  for  the  passage  in  ch.  xlix.  10,  which  in  the 
common  version  makes  mention  of  them,  is  shown  by  Bretschneidcr 
[ill  loc.)  to  be  clearly  spurious,  it  having  been  copied  verbatim  from  oh, 
xlvi.  12,  with  merely  the  substitution  of  the  words  "  the  twelve  prophets" 
for  the  Avord  '•  their."  See  Prof.  Stuart,  Com.  p.  463.  How  can  such 
an  omission  be  accounted  for  if  the  objection  derived  from  the  omission 
of  the  name  of  Daniel  has  any  force  ?  And  if  the  mere  silence  of  the  Son 
of  Sirach  be  allowed  to  be  an  argument  against  the  existence  of  pro- 
minent persons  in  the  Jewish  histoi-y,  and  the  genuineness  of  the  books 
which  they  wrote,  who  will  determine  the  limit  to  which  the  objection 
will  go  ?  How  small  a  portion  of  the  patriarchs  and  prophets  ;  how  small 
a  portion  of  the  writings  of  the  Old  Testament,  would  be  spared  !  And, 
after  all,  why  should  so  much  weight  be  allowed  to  the  mere  silence  of 
the  Son  of  Sirach  —  an  author  comparatively  unknown  —  as  to  set  aside 
the  positive  testimony  of  all  antiquity,  and  change  the  foith  of  the 
world  ? 

§  3.  CONTINUATION  OF  THE  ARGUMENT  FOR  THE  GENUINENESS 
AND  AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL. 

B.  Positive  Proof s  of  its  Genuineness  and  Autlienticitij. 

H.\viNG  thus  examined  at  length  the  objections  which  have  been  made 
to  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  I  proceed 
now  to  notice  the  positive  proofs  that  it  was  written  at  the  time  when  it 
is  alleged  to  have  been,  and  by  the  author  whose  name  it  bears.  This 
need  not  detain  us  long;  for  if  the  objections  which  are  made  to  the 
genuineness  of  the  book  are  not  well  founded,  there  will  be  little  diffi- 
culty in  showing  that  the  common  sentiment  in  the  church  in  regard  to 
its  authorship  and  authenticity  is  correct.  It  has  undeniably  for  a  long 
time  had  a  place  in  the  sacred  canon ;  it  has  been  received  by  the 
Christian  church  at  all  times  as  a  sacred  book,  on  the  same  level  with 
the  other  inspired  books ;  it  has  had  a  place  among  the  books  regarded 
by  the  Jews  as  inspired,  and  if  it  cannot  be  displaced  from  the  position 
which  it  has  so  long  occupied,  the  conclusion  would  seem  to  be  fair 
that  that  is  its  proper  position.  "We  have  seen,  in  the  previous  dis- 
cussian,  that  it  was  ranked  by  Josephus  among  the  prophetic  books  ;  that 
it  W5t3  held  in  high  estimation  among  the  J(^ws  as  one  of  their  sacred 
books;  that  the  canon  of  Scripture  was  closed  some  four  hundred  years 
before  the  time  of  the  Saviour,  and  that,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  it 
would  have  been  impossible  to  foist  a  book  of  doubtful  origin,  or  an 
acknowledged  fiction,  into  that  canon  in  a  later  age. 

In  looking  now  at  the  positive  evidence  of  the   genuineness  and 


XLIV  INTRODUCTION. 

canonical  authority  of  the  book,  the  only  points  that  are  really  necessary 
to  be  made  out  are  two:  —  that  it  is  the  work  of  one  author,  and  thai 
that  author  was  the  Daniel  of  the  captivity.  If  these  two  points  can  be 
established,  its  right  to  a  place  in  the  canon  will  be  easily  demonstrated. 
My  object,  then,  Avill  be  to  establish  these  two  points,  and  then  to  show 
how,  if  these  points  are  admitted,  it  follows  that  the  book  is  inspired, 
and  has  a  right  to  a  place  in  the  canon. 

I.  It  is  the  work  of  one  author.  That  is,  it  is  not  made  up  of  frag- 
ments from  difierent  hands,  and  composed  at  different  times.  It  is  a 
book  by  itself,  every  part  of  which  is  entitled  to  credit  if  any  part 
of  it  is,  and  entitled  to  the  same  credit  on  the  ground  of  being  the  com- 
position of  the  same  author.  ' 

The  evidence  of  this  lies  in  such  circumstances  as  the  following: — 

(1.)  It  is  apparent  on  the  face  of  the  book  that  the  design  is  to  repre- 
sent it  as  the  production  of  one  author.  If  the  book  is  a  forgery,  this 
was  no  doubt  the  intention  of  its  author  ;  if  it  is  genuine,  it  was  of  course 
the  design.  No  one,  on  reading  the  book,  it  is  presumed,  could  fail  to 
perceive  that  the  design  of  the  author  was  to  leave  the  impression  that  it 
is  the  work  of  one  hand,  and  that  It  was  Intended  to  represent  what 
occurred  in  the  lifetime  of  one  man,  and  that  one  man  had  committed  It 
to  writing.  This  is  apparent,  because  the  same  name  occurs  throughout ; 
because  there  Is  substantially  one  series  of  transactions  ;  because  the 
transactions  are  referred  to  as  occurring  in  one  place  —  Babylon;  and 
because  the  same  languages,  customs,  usages,  and  times,  are  referred  to. 
All  the  internal  marks  which  can  go  to  demonstrate  that  any  work  Is  by  ono 
hand  would  be  found  to  be  applicable  to  this ;  and  all  the  external  marks 
■vrill  be  found  also  to  agree  with  this  supposition. 

There  are  two  things,  Indeed,  to  be  admitted,  which  have  been  relied 
on  by  some,  to  prove  that  the  work  is  the  composition  of  different 
authors. 

(a)  The  one  is,  that  It  Is  divided  into  two  parts : — the  one  (ch.  i.-vi.),  In 
the  main  historical ;  the  other  (ch.  vii.-xil.).  In  the  main  prophetical. 
But  this  Is  no  argument  against  the  identity  of  the  authorship,  for  the 
same  intermingling  of  history  with  prophecy  occurs  in  most  of  the  pro- 
phetic books  ;  and  it  Is  no  objection  that  these  occur  in  separate  con- 
tinuous portions  instead  of  being  Irregularlj'  intermingled.  In  fact,  the 
same  thing  occurs  in  Isaiah,  where  the  first  part  (ch.  i.-xxxix.)  is  made 
up.  In  a  considerable  degree,  of  historic  allusions  mingled  with  prophesy  ; 
and  where  the  second  part  (ch.  xl.-lxvl.)  is  wholly  prophetic.  Besides, 
an}'-  one  must  admit  that  on  the  supposition  that  Daniel  -n  as  the  sole 
author  of  the  book,  nothing  would  be  more  natural  than  this  ve  •}'  arrange- 
ment. What  objection  could  there  be  to  the  supposition  that  one  part 
of  his  book  might  relate  to  historic  incidents  mainly — though  even  these 
have  a  strong  prophetic  character  —  and  that  the  other  should  be  com- 
posed of  prophecies  ?  AVhat  would  there  bo  in  his  condition  or  character 
that  would  forbid  such  a  supposition  ? 

(6)  The  other  circumstance  Is,  that,  between  these  two  parts,  there  is 
a  change  In  the  ^jerwu  of  the  writer — that  in  the  first  portion  (eh.  i.-vi.), 
he  uses  the  third  person  when  speaking  of  Daniel,  and  In  the  other  (ch. 
vll.-xii.),  the  first  person.  This  is,  in  the  main,  true,  though  It  is  true 
fdso  that  In  the  second  part  the  third  person  is  sometimea  used  when 


INTRODUCTION.  XLV 

jjpeaking  ^f  himself,  ch.  vii.  1,  x.  1.  But  in  I'cgarcl  to  this,  it  may  be 
observed,  (1.)  that  it  is  no  uncommon  thing  for  an  author  to  speak  of 
himself  in  the  third  person.  This  is  uniformly  done  by  Cojsar  in  his 
Commentaries,  and  this  fact  is  never  urged  now  as  an  argument  against 
the  genuineness  of  his  -woi-k.  (2.)  This  is  often  done  by  the  prophets. 
See  Isa.  ii.  1,  vii.  3,  xiii.  1;  Ezek.  i.  3.  So  llosea,  throughout  the  first 
chapter  of  his  book,  speaks  uniformly  of  himself  in  the  third  person,  and 
in  clis,  ii.  and  iii.  in  the  first  person  ;  and  so  Amos,  ch.  vii.  1,  2,  4,  5, 
7,  8,  speaks  of  himself  in  the  first  person,  and  again,  vs.  12,  14,  in  the 
third  person.  It  may  be  added,  that  it  is  the  uniform  method,  also,  of  the 
Evangelist  John  to  speak  of  himself  in  the  third  person  ;  and,  in  fact,  this 
is  so  common  in  authors  that  it  can  constitute  no  argument  against  the 
genuineness  of  any  particular  book. 

It  may  be  observed,  also,  tliat,  in  general,  those  Avho  ha.ve  denied  the 
genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  have  admitted  that 
it  is  the  work  of  one  author.  This  is  expressly  admitted  by  Longerke, 
p.  ci.,  who  says,  "The  identity  of  the  author  appears  from  the  uniformity 
of  the  plan,  and  the  relations  which  the  diflerent  parts  bear  to  each  other; 
that  the  historical  and  prophetic  parts  are  related  to  each  other;  that 
there  is  a  certain  uniform  gradation  (Stufenfolgc)  of  the  oracles  from  the 
uncertain  to  the  certain  ;  that  there  is  a  remarkable  similarity  of  ideas, 
images,  and  forms  of  speech  ;  and  that  in  the  respective  parts  of  the  He- 
brew and  Chaldee,  there  is  great  similarity  of  style."  The  same  opinion 
is  maintained  by  Dereser,  Gesenius,  Bleek,  De  Wette,  Kirms,  Hofl'mann, 
and  Ilengstenberg ;  though  nearly  all  of  these  authors  suppose  that  it 
was  written  in  the  time  of  the  jNIaecabees.  They  admit,  however,  that  it 
is  the  work  of  a  single  author.  Eichhorn  and  Bertholdt  appear  to  have 
been  the  only  authors  of  distinction  who  have  denied  it. 

(2.)  The  identity  of  the  book  appears  from  the  manner  in  which  it  is 
written  in  respect  to  language.  We  have  already  seen  that  a  part  of  it 
is  written  in  Hebrew,  and  a  part  in  Chaldee.  From  the  beginning  to  ch. 
ii.  4,  it  is  Ilebrevk' ;  then  from  ch.  ii.  4,  to  the  end  of  ch.  vii.  it  is  Chaldee, 
and  the  remainder  (ch.  viii.-xii.)  is  Hebrew.  Now,  it  may  be  admitted, 
that  if  the  historical  part  (ch.  i.-vi.)  had  been  wholly  in  either  of  these 
languages,  and  the  prophetical  part  (ch.  vii.-xii.)  had  been  wholly  in  the 
other,  it  might  have  constituted  a  plausible  argument  against  the 
identity  of  the  book.  But  the  present  arrangement  is  one  that  furnishes 
no  such  argument.  It  cannot  well  be  conceived  that  if  the  work 
were  the  production  of  two  authors,  one  Avould  begin  his  portion  in  one 
language  and  end  it  in  another,  and  that  the  other  would  just  reverse 
the  process  in  regard  to  languages.  Such  an  arrangement  would  not  be 
likely  to  occur  in  two  independent  compositions  professedly  treating  of  the 
I  same  general  subjects,  and  intended  to  be  palmed  off  as  the  work  of  one 
author.  As  it  is,  the  arrangement  is  natural,  and  easy  to  be  accounted 
for ;  but  the  other  supposition  would  imply  an  artifice  in  composition 
•which  would  not  be  likely  to  occur,  and  which  would  be  wholly  unneces- 
sary for  any  purpose  which  can  be  imagined. 

(3.)  The  identity  of  the  book  appears  from  the  fact  that  it  refers  to  the 
,eame  series  of  subjects  ;  that  the  same  great  design  is  pursued  through 
the  whole.  Thus  in  the  two  parts,  though  the  first  is  mainly  historical, 
and  the  last  prophetical,  there  is  a  remarkable  parallelism  between  the 


XLVI  INTRODUCTION. 

predictions  in  ch.  ii.  and  in  ch.  vii.  The  same  great  series  of  events  is 
referred  to,  though  in  different  forms ;  and  so  throughout  the  book,  as 
remarked  above  in  the  quotation  from  Lengcrke,  wg  meet  Avith  the  same 
ideas,  the  same  modes  of  speech,  the  same  sj-mbols,  the  same  imagery, 
the  operation  of  the  same  mind,  and  tlie  manifestation  of  the  same  cha- 
racter in  the  authors.  The  Daniel  of  the  first  part  is  the  Daniel  of  the 
last ;  and,  in  this  respect,  the  similarity  is  so  groat  as  to  leave  the  irre- 
sistible impression  on  the  mind  that  he  is  the  personage  of  the  Avholo 
book,  and  that  his  own  hand  is  apparent  throughout. 

(4.)  The  identity  of  the  book  appears  from  the  fact  that  the  objectiong 
made  to  it  pertain  alike  to  every  part  of  it,  and  in  reference  to  the  dif- 
ferent parts  are  substantially  the  same.  By  referring  to  the  objectiona 
which  have,  in  the  previous  section,  been  examined  at  length,  it  will  be 
seen  that  they  all  suppose  the  identity  of  the  book,  or  that  they  are 
drawn  from  the  book  considered  as  a  whole,  and  not  from  any  particular 
part.  Whatever  difficulty  there  is  in  regard  to  the  book  pertains  to  it  as 
a  whole,  and  difficulties  of  precisely  the  same  kind  lie  scattered  through 
the  entire  volume.  This  fact  proves  that  the  book  has  such  an  identity 
as  appertains  to  one  and  the  same  author ;  and  this  fact  would  not  be 
likely  to  occur  in  a  book  that  was  made  up  of  the  productions  of  different 
authors. 

(5.)  It  may  be  added,  that  whenever  Daniel  is  spoken  of  by  Josephus, 
by  the  Saviour,  or  Ijy  the  early  Christian  writers,  it  is  alwaj-s  done  as  if 
the  book  was  the  production  of  one  author.  Just  such  language  is  used 
as  would  be  used  on  the  supposition  that  the  book  is  the  composition 
of  one  man ;  nor  is  there  an  intimation  that  there  were  two  Daniels,  Oi' 
that  there  was  even  any  doubt  about  the  identity  of  the  authorship. 

The  fact  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  the  production  of  one  author,  may 
be  regarded  as  established.  Indeed,  there  is  no  ancient  work  concerning 
which  the  evidence  is  more  direct  and  clear. 

II.  The  second  point  to  be  made  out  is,  that  the  author  was  the 
Daniel  of  the  captivity.  The  evidences  on  this  point  will  be  adduced  in 
the  order,  not  of  time,  but  of  what  seems  due  to  them  in  value  and  im- 
portance. 

(1.)  I  refer,  first,  to  the  testimony  of  the  writer  himself.  In  chs.  vii. 
28,  viii.  2,  15,  27,  ix.  2,  x.  1,  xii.  5,  the  writer  speaks  of  himself  as 
"  I  Daniel ;"  that  is,  the  same  Daniel  whose  history  is  given  in  ch.  i. 
This  cannot  be,  indeed,  regarded  as  conclusive  evidence ;  for  the  forger 
of  a  book  might  insert  the  name  of  another  person  as  the  author, 
and  be  constant  in  maintaining  it  to  be  so.  All  that  is  affirmed  is,  that 
this  is  prima  facie  evidence,  and  is  good  evidence  until  it  is  set  aside 
by  substantial  reasons.  We  assume  this  in  regard  to  any  book,  and 
the  evidence  should  be  admitted  unless  there  are  satisfoctory  reasons  for 
supposing  that  the  name  is  assumed  for  purposes  of  deception.  It  cannot 
be  doubted  that  the  book  bears  on  its  foce  the  appearance  and  the  clain'- 
of  having  been  written  by  the  Daniel  of  the  captivity,  and  that,  in  this 
respect,  it  is  altogether  such  as  it  would  be  on  that  supposition.  There 
is  certainly  an  air  of  simplicity,  honesty,  and  sincerity  about  it  which  we 
expect  to  find  in  a  genuine  production. 

(2.)  I  refer,  secondly,  to  the  fact  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  was  received 
iitQ  the  canon  o^  the  Old  Tvstament  as  an  authentic  work  of  the  Daniel 


INTRODUCTION.  XLN II 

of  the  captivity,  and  as  entitled  to  a  place  among  the  inspired  books  ot 
Scripture. 

(a)  It  has  been  sho-\vn  above,  that  the  Canon  of  Scripture  vras  re- 
garded as  complete  long  before  the  time  of  the  INIaccabees ;  or  that, 
according  to  the  testimony  of  Josephus,  there  were  three  classes  of  books 
among  the  Hebrews,  all  regarded  as  sacred  books,  and  all,  in  this  respect, 
diflering  from  certain  other  books  which  they  had,  as  containing  the 
record  of  affairs  subsequent  to  the  time  of  Artaxerses.  These  classes  of 
books  were  known  as  tlie  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  "  Kethubim" — the 
*'  other  writings,"  or  the  ''  llagiography  ;"  and  these  books  together  con 
stituted  what,  in  the  New  Testament,  are  called  the  Scriptures,  or  Scrip 
hire :  the  Scripture  in  IMatt.  xii.  10,  xv.  28  ;  Luke  iv.  21 ;  John  ii.  22,  vii 
38,  42,  X.  35,  xix.  37  ;  Kom.  iv.  3,  ix.  17  ;  Gal.  iii.  8,  22 ;  2  Tim.  iii.  16 
1  Pet.  ii.  G ;  2  Pet.  i.  20 ;  the  Scriptures  in  Matt.  xxi.  42,  xxii.  29,  xxvi. 
54;  Luke  xxiv.  27,  32,  45;  John  v.  39;  Acts  xvii.  2,  11,  xviii.  24,  28  j 
Eom.  i.  2,  XV.  4,  xvi.  20;  1  Cor.  xv.  3,  4;  2  Tim.  iii.  15  ;  2  Pet.  iii.  16. 
These  constituted  a  collection  of  writings  which  were  distinct  from  all 
others,  and  the  use  of  the  word  Scripture,  or  Scriptures,  at  once  suggested 
them,  and  no  others,  to  the  mind. 

(b)  The  Book  of  Daniel  was  found  in  that  list  of  writings,  and  would 
be  suggested  by  that  term  as  belonging  to  the  general  collection.  That 
is,  in  order  to  adduce  his  authority,  or  to  mention  a  prophecy  in  that  book, 
it  would  be  done  as  readily  as  a  part  of  the  Scriptures,  and  would  be  as 
well  understood,  as  in  quoting  a  declaration  of  Moses  or  Isaiah.  This  is 
apparent  (1)  from  the  fact  seen  above,  that  Josephus  must  have  regarded 
Daniel  as  having  a  rank  among  the  prophets ;  and  (2),  mainly,  from  the 
fact  that  Daniel  has  ahcays,  from  the  earliest  knowledge  which  we  have 
of  the  book,  had  a  place  in  the  canon.  The  book  has  never,  so  for  as  we 
have  any  knowledge,  been  placed  among  the  Apocryphal  writings.  It 
was  evidently  regarded  by  Josephus,  speaking  the  common  sentiment  of 
his  countrymen,  as  having  a  place  in  the  canonical  writings  ;  it  was  cer- 
iainhj  so  regarded  by  the  authors  of  the  Talmud,  though  they  assigned 
it  a  place  in  the  third  division,  or  Kethubim ;  it  is  expressly  so  men- 
tioned by  Jerome,  by  Melito,  Bishop  of  Sardis  (A.  D.  170),  by  Origen,  by 
the  Council  of  Laodicea  (A.  D.  360-364),  by  Cyrill  of  Jerusalem  (A.  D. 
350),  by  Gregory  Nazianzen  (A.  D.  370),  by  Athanasius  of  Alexandria 
(A.  D.  326),  and  by  the  author  of  the  Synopsis  Scripturag  SacrM,  who 
lived  in  the  time  of  Athanasius.  See  Prof.  Stuart  on  the  Old  Testament. 
Appendix.  From  that  time  onward  it  is  needless  to  show  that  the  Book 
of  Daniel  has  alicaijs  had  a  place  in  the  canon  of  Scripture,  and  been  re- 

farded  as  on  a  level  with  the  other  writings  of  the  sacred  volume, 
ndeed,  it  has  never  had,  so  far  as  we  have  any  historical  information, 
any  other  place  than  that,  but  wherever  known,  and  wherever  men- 
itioned.  it  has  always  been  as  a  portion  of  the  sacred  writings. 

(c)  It  is  -norally  certain  that  it  could  not  have  been  introduced  into 
that  canon  if  it  was  the  work  of  a  later  age,  and  if  it  was  not  believed,  at 
the  time  when  the  canon  of  the  Old  Testament  was  completed,  or  when 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  were  collected  and  arranged,  by  whom- 
fcoever  this  was  done,  to  have  been  the  genuine  work  of  Daniel.  This 
point  has  been  considered  already.  The  Jews  were  the  most  cautious  of 
all  people  in  regard  to  their  sacred  books,  and  at  an  early  period  of  their 


XLVIII  INTRODUCTION.  : 

history  the  contending  sects  of  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  arose,  and 
from  the  very  nature  of  their  opinions,  and  the  vigilance  of  the  one 
against  the  other,  it  was  impossible  that  a  book  couM  be  introduced 
into  the  sacred  canon  which  was  not  universally  regarded  as  genuine  and 
authentic.  The  exact  period,  indeed,  when  these  sects  arose  has  not 
been  determined,  and  cannot  now  be  ;  but  it  is  put  beyond  a  doubt  that  it ; 
was  before  the  time  of  the  Maccabees.  Josephus  hrst  mentions  them 
(Ant.  xiii.  5,  9)  under  the  high-priest  Jonathan  (B.  C.  159-144) ;  but  he 
mentions  them,  together  with  the  Essenes,  as  sects  already  fully  and 
definitely  formed.  Winer  thinks  that  the  spirit  of  Judaism,  soon  after 
the  return  from  the  exile,  gave  rise  to  a  feeling  which  led  to  the  forma- 
tion of  the  party  of  the  Pharisees  ;  and  that  this  very  naturally  called  forth 
an  opposition  which  embodied  itself  in  the  party  of  the  Sadducees.  In  the 
time  of  John  Hyrcanus,  nephew  of  Judas  Maccabceus,  Josephus  speaks 
of  the  Pharisees  as  having  such  influence  with  the  common  people  that 
"  they  would  be  believed  even  if  they  uttered  anything  against  the  king  or 
high-priest."  The  Sadducees  were  always  opposed  to  them ;  ahvays 
watched  all  their  movements,  opinions,  and  aims,  with  jealousy  ;  always 
contended  Avith  them  for  power,  and  always  embodied  in  their  own  ranks 
no  small  part  of  the  learning,  the  Avealth,  and  the  influence  of  the  nation. 
The  main  subject  of  division  between  them  was  one  that  pertains  to  the 
very  point  before  us.  It  was  not  the  question  about  the  existence  of 
angel  or  spirit,  or  the  question  of  predestination,  as  has  been  sometimes 
said,  but  it  was  wliether  the  Scriptures  are  to  be  regarded  as  the  onhj  rule 
of  faith  and  practice.  The  Pharisees  insisted  on  the  authority  of  tra- 
dition, and  claimed  that  the  oral  or  unwritten  law  w^as  of  equal  authority 
with  the  written ;  while  the  Sadducees  rejected  all  traditions  and  ordi- 
nances of  men  not  expressly  sanctioned  by  the  Scriptures.  So  Josephus 
says  expressly  :  "  Their  custom  was,  to  regard  nothing  except  the  Laws 
[that  is,  the  written  Laws  —  the  Old  Testament]  ;  for  they  reckon  it  as  a 
virtue  to  dispute  against  the  doctors  in  favor  of  the  wisdom  {ao'j>\ai)  ^vhich 
they  follow."  Ant.  xviii.  1,  4.  Again,  in  Ant.  xviii.  10,  G,  he  says, 
"  The  Pharisees  inculcated  many  rules  upon  the  people,  received  from 
the  fathers,  which  are  not  written  in  the  Law  of  Moses ;  and  on  this 
account  the  sect  of  the  Sadducees  reject  them,  alleging  that  those  things 
are  to  be  regarded  as  rules  Avhich  are  written"  [in  the  Scriptures],  "  but 
that  the  traditions  of  the  fathers  are  not  to  be  observed." 

The  rise  of  these  contending  sects  must,  at  all  events,  be  referred  to  a 
time  which  preceded  the  JNIaccabees  —  the  time  when  it  is  pretended  by 
objectors  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  was  composed.  But  the  moment  when 
these  two  parties  were  formed,  the  extent  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures  was, 
of  course,  a  matter  that  was  fully  and  permanently  decided.  It  is  im- 
possible to  suppose  that  the  Sadducees  would  concede  to  their  antagonists 
the  right  to  introduce  new  books  into  the  canon,  or  that  a  new  book  could 
be  introduced  without  producing  controversy.  This  would  have  been ' 
giving  up  the  very  point  in  dispute.  No  book  could  be  introduced,  or 
could  be  recognised  as  entitled  to  a  place  there,  which  was  not  acknow- 
ledged by  both  parties  as  having  been  written  by  a  true  prophet,  and  as 
being  believed  to  be  divinely  inspired.  If  the  Book  of  Daniel,  then, 
was  the  work  of  that  age,  and  was  falsely  attributed  to  the  Daniel  of  the 
exile,  it  is  impossible  that  it  could  have  been  introduced  into  the  canon. 


INTRODUCTION  XLIS, 

(d)  It  may  be  asked,  in  addition,  vrhj,  if  the  Book  of  Daniel  was 
written  in  the  time  of  tiie  Maccabees,  and  was  then  introduced  into  tho 
canon,  tlie  Book  of  Ecclesiasticus,  and  other  books  of  the  Apocrypha, 
were  not  also  introduced '!  If  the  book  of  Daniel  was  spurious,  what  was 
there  that  should  entitle  ihat  to  a  place  in  the  canon  which  could  not  have 
been  urfjed  in  fiivor  of  the  "  Book  of  Wisdom,"  or  of  some  of  the  other 
books  of  the  Apocrypha?  Yet  these  books  never  found  a  place  in  the 
canon,  and  wore  never  I'cgarded  as  belonging  to  it ;  and  there  was,  there- 
fore, some  reason  why  Daniel  liad  a  place  there  which  could  not  l)e 
applied  to  them.  The  only  reason  must  have  been  that  the  Book  of 
Daniel  was  regarded  as  the  genuine  work  of  the  Daniel  of  the  exile,  and 
therefore  written  by  a  prophet  before  the  times  of  inspiration  ceased. 

(3.)  I  refer,  third,  in  proof  of  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the 
Book  of  Daniel,  to  the  New  Testament. 

Daniel  is  expressly  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament  but  onoc,  and 
that  is  by  the  Saviour,  in  Matt.  xxiv.  15,  and  in  the  parallel  passage  in 
Mark  xiii.  14.  In  the  former  passage  the  Saviour  says,  "  When  ye, 
therefore,  shall  see  the  abomination  of  desolation,  spoken  of  by  Daniel 
the  prophet,  stand  in  the  holy  place  (whoso  readeth  let  him  understand), 
then  let  them  which  be  in  Judea  flee  into  the  mountains."  In  the  latter 
place — the  same  passage  reported  l)y  another  writer — "  But  when  ye  shall 
see  the  abomination  of  desolation  spoken  of  by  Daniel  the  prophet, 
standing  where  it  ought  not  (let  him  that  readeth  understand),  then  let 
them  which  be  in  Judea,"  &e. 

These,  it  must  be  admitted,  are  the  only  places  in  the  New  Testament 
where  Daniel  is  directly  quoted,  though  it  cannot  be  denied  that  there 
are  others  which  seem  to  imply  that  the  book  was  known,  and  that  it 
was  intended  to  be  referred  to.  Comp.  tho  argument  in  Hengstenberg, 
Authentic  des  Daniel,  pp.  273-277.  The  passages  of  this  nature  referred 
to  by  De  Wette,  |  255,  (3),  and  commonly  relied  on,  are  the  following: — 

1  Peter  i.  10,  seq.     Compared  with  Daniel  xii.  8,  seq. 

2  Thess.  ii.  3.  "  "        vii.  8,  25. 
1  Cor.  vi.  2.                      "  "        vii.  22. 

Heb.  xi.  33.  "  "        vi. 

In  regard  to  these  passages,  however,  it  may  be  doubted  of  some  of 
them  (2  Thess.  ii.  3,  1  Cor.  vi.  2)  whether  there  is  in  them  any  designed 
allusion  to  any  prophet  of  the  Old  Testament;  and  of  1  Pet.  i.  10,  that 
the  allusion  is  so  general  that  it  cannot  be  demonstrated  that  Peter  had 
his  eye  on  Daniel  rather  than  on  the  other  prophets,  or  that  he  neces- 
sarily included  Daniel  in  the  number;   and  of  tlio  other  passage  (Heb. 
xi.  33,  ("  Stopped  the  mouths  of  lions"),  that,  from  anything  that  appears 
in  the  passage,  it  cannot  be  demonstrated  that  Paul  meant  to  refer  to 
Daniel,  or,  if  he  did,  all  that  is  there  implied  may  have  been  founded  on 
a  traditionary  report  of  Daniel,  and  it  cannot  be  adduced  as  proof  that 
he  meant  to  refer  to  the  Book  of  Daniel.     It  cannot  be  denied  that  there 
1  is,  in  some  respects,  a  very  strong  resemblance  between  the  Book  of 
I  Daniel  and  the  Book  of  Revelation,  and  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  was 
I  familiar  to  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse,  but  still,  as  Daniel  is  not  ex- 
,  pressly  quoted  or  referred  to,  it  cannot  be  demonstrated  with  certainty 
I  that  John  meant  to  recognise  the  book  as  inspired.     The  argument,  then, 

i*ests  mainly,  if  not  exclusively,  on  the  testimony  of  the  Saviour. 
,5 


L  INTRODt'CTION. 

And  here  it  is  proper  to  say  that,  in  this  country,  we  may  lay  out  of 
view,  as  not  -worihy  of  attention,  the  remark  of  De  Wettc,  that  "  Christ 
neither  icoiild  [ivollte)  nor  could  {konnte),  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  be 
a  critical  authoritij."  §  255,  (3).  In  this  argument  it  must  be  assumed, 
tliat  if  a  book  of  the  Old  Testament  can  be  shown  to  have  Ins  sanction, 
it  is  to  be  regarded  as  belonging  to  the  inspired  canon.  Or,  to  state  the 
proposition  in  a  form  -vYhich  cannot,  on  any  account,  be  regarded  as  ob- 
jectionable, the  point  of  inquiry  is,  to  ascertain  whether  Uhrist  did,  or 
did  not,  regard  the  Book  of  Daniel  as  belonging  to  the  canon  of  the 
inspired  writings,  and  as  coming  within  the  class  which  he,  in  John 
V.  39,  and  elsewhere  calls  "the  Scriptures." 

Now,  in  reg.ard  to  this  reference  to  Daniel  by  the  Saviour,  considered 
as  an  argument  for  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the  book,  the 
following  remarks  may  be  made  : — 

(a)  There  is  a  distinct  recognition  of  Daniel  as  a  historical  personage — 
as  a  man.  This  is  plain  on  the  face  of  the  quotation — for  he  refers  to  him 
as  he  would  to  Moses,  Isaiah,  or  Jeremiah.  No  one  can  believe  that  he 
regarded  Daniel  as  a  lictitious  or  fabulous  personage,  or  that,  in  this 
respect,  he  meant  to  speak  of  him  as  different  from  the  most  eminent  of 
the  ancient  prophets.  Indeed,  in  all  the  doubts  that  have  been  expressed 
about  the  genuineness  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  it  has  never  been  main- 
tained that  the  Lord  Jesus  did  not  mean  to  be  understood  as  referring  to 
Daniel  as  a  real  historical  personage. 

(6)  He  refers  to  him  as  a  prophet:  "  When  ye  shall  see  the  abomina- 
tion of  desolation,  spoken  of  by  Daniel,  the  prophet" — tO-j  irpoipnrov.  This 
word  he  uses  evidently,  in  its  ordinary'  signification,  as  meaning  one  who 
predicted  future  events,  a'nd  as  entitled  to  a  rank  among  the  true 
prophets.  It  is  the  very  word  which  Josephus,  in  a  passage  quoted  above, 
employs  in  relation  to  Daniel,  and  is  manifestly  used  in  the  same  sense. 
The  Saviour  assigns  him  no  inferior  place  among  the  prophets ;  regards 
him  as  having  uttered  a  true  prediction,  or  a  prediction  Avhich  was  to  be 
fulfilled  at  a  period  subsequent  to  the  time  when  he  was  then  speaking ; 
and  refers  to  him,  in  this  respect,  as  he  would  have  done  to  any  one  of 
the  ancient  inspired  writers. 

(c)  He  refers  to  him  as  the  author  of  a  book,  and,  by  his  manner  of 
speaking  of  him,  and  by  the  quotation  which  he  makes,  gives  his  sanction 
to  some  well-knoAvn  book  of  which  he  regarded  Daniel  as  the  author. 
This,  which  if  true  settles  the  question  about  the  testimony  of  the 
Saviour,  is  apparent  from  the  following  considerations:  (1.)  From  the 
very  use  of  the  \\oi-(\.  prophet  here.  It  is  evident,  on  the  face  of  the  pas- 
sage, that  he  refers  to  him  in  the  use  of  this  word,  not  as  having  spoken 
the  prediction,  but  as  having  recorded  it ;  that  the  language  is  iisetl  as  it 
would  have  been  of  any  other  of  the  "  prophets,"  or  of  those  who  had 
this  appellation  because  they  had  made  a  record  predicting  future  events. 
It  is  clear  that  the  Avord  among  the  Jews  had  so  far  a  technical  significa- 
tion, that  this  would  at  once  be  suggested  on  its  use.  (2)  Because  he 
quotes  the  language  found  in  the  Book  of  Daniel — iSicXvy/ia  ni;  iytawaswi. 
This  very  phrase  occurs  in  the  Greek  translation,  in  ch.  xii.  11,  and  a 
similar  expression  —  (iiiXvyfia  TCii>  tpcuwacui'  —  occurs  in  ch.  ix.  27;  and 
another  similar  expression — (HiXvyna  -npavtankyov — occurs  in  ch.  xi.  31.  The 
phrase,  therefore,  may  be  regarded  as  belonging  to  Daniel,  not  only  by 


INTRODUCTION.  U 

the  express  mention  of  his  name,  but  by  the  fact  that  it  does  not 
elsewhere  occur  in  the  sacred  Scriptures.  (3.)  The  same  thing  is 
apparent  from  the  parenthetical  expression,  "  Whoso  readeth,  let 
him  understand."  The  point  of  this  remark  is  in  the  word  '■'■readeth," 
as  referring  to  some  written  record.  There  has  been,  indeed,  much 
difference  of  opinion  in  regard  to  this  phrase,  whether  it  is  to  be 
considered  as  the  command  of  the  Saviour  that  they  who  read  the  words 
of  Daniel  should  pay  attention  to  its  meaning;  or  whether  it  is  the 
remark  of  the  evangelist,  designed  tc  call  attention  to  the  meaning  of 
the  prophecy,  and  to  tlie  words  of  the  Saviour.  In  my  Notes  on  the  pas- 
sage in  Matt.  xsiv.  15,  the  opinion  is  expressed  that  these  are  the  words 
of  the  evangelist.  It  is  proper  now  to  say,  that  on  a  more  careful  con- 
sideration of  that  passage  this  seems  to  me  to  be  very  doubtful ;  but 
whether  correct  or  not,  it  would  only  vary  the  force  of  the  argumonl  by 
making  Matthew  the  speaker  instead  of  the  Saviour.  It  would  still  be 
an  inspired  testimony  that,  at  the  time  when  Matthew  wrote,  there  was 
a  book  which  was  understood  to  be  the  production  of  Daniel,  and  that  it 
was  the  intention  of  the  evangelist  to  rank  him  among  the  prophets,  and 
to  call  particular  attention  to  what  he  had  tcritien.  The  interpretation 
of  the  parenthesis,  it  must  be  admitted,  however,  is  so  uncertain  that  no 
argument  can  be  founded  on  it  to  denonstrate  that  Christ  meant  to  call 
attention  to  the  words  of  Daniel ;  but  the  passage  does  prove  that  such 
words  to  be  '•'read"  were  found  in  the  book,  and  that  in  order  to 
determine  their  exact  sense  there  was  need  of  close  attention.  Olshausen 
agrees  with  the  interpretation  of  the  parenthesis  expressed  in  my  Notes 
on  Matthew,  regarding  it  as  the  declaration  of  the  evangelist.  The  older 
expositors  generally  regard  the  parenthesis  as  the  words  of  the  Saviour ; 
more  recent  ones  generally  as  the  words  of  the  evangelist.  The  former 
opinion  is  defended  by  Ilengstenberg.     Authen.  pp.  259,  2G0, 

Whichever  interpretation  is  adopted,  it  seems  clear,  from  the  above 
remarks,  that  the  Saviour  meant  to  refer  to  Daniel  as  a  real  historical 
personage,  and  to  a  well-known  Ijook  bearing  his  name,  as  a  genuine  pro- 
duction of  the  Daniel  of  the  exile.  If  so,  then  the  testimony  of  Christ  i'j 
expressly  in  favor  of  its  canonical  authority. 

(4.)  I  refer,  fourth,  inproof  of  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the 
book,  or  in  proof  that  it  was  written  by  the  Daniel  of  the  captivity,  to  th« 
fact  that  it  had  an  existence  before  the  times  of  the  Maccabees,  andAvas  re- 
ferred to  then  as  among  the  books  having  a  divine  authoritj'.  This  might, 
indeed,  be  regarded  as  already  demonstrated,  if  it  had  a  place  in  the  Canon 
of  Scripture,  as  I  have  endeavoured  to  show  that  it  had  ;  but  there  is  other 
proof  of  this  that  will  go  further  to  confirm  the  point.  It  will  be  recol- 
lected that  one  of  the  main  positions  of  those  who  deny  its  genuineness 
is,  that  it  was  written  in  the  time  of  the  Maccabees  by  some  one  who 
assumed  the  name  of  Daniel.  The  point  now  to  be  made  out  is,  that 
there  is  direct  evidence  that  it  had  an  existence  before  that  time.  In 
proof  of  this,  I  refer, 

(a)  To  the  testimony  of  Josephus.  Ills  statement  is  found  in  his  "  Anti- 
quities," b.  xi.  ch.  viii.,  in  the  account  wdiich  he  gives  of  the  interview 
between  Alexander  and  the  high-priest  Jaddua,  in  Jerusalem :  "  And 
vrhen  he  went  up  into  the  temple,  he  offered  sacrifices  to  God,  according 
■ft  the  high-priest's  direction  ;  and  magnificently  treated  both  the  high- 


MI  INTRODUCTION. 

priest  and  the  priests.  And  when  the  Book  of  Daniel  was  shown  to 
iiiin,  wherein  Daniel  declared  that  one  of  the  Greeks  should  destroy  th« 
empire  of  the  Persians,  he  supposed  that  himself  was  the  person 
intended.  And  as  ho  was  then  glad,  he  dismissed  the  multitude  for  the 
present ;  but  the  next  day  he  called  them  to  him,  and  bade  them  ask 
what  favors  they  pleased  of  him."  The  genuineness  of  this  narrative 
has  been  examined  at  length  by  Ilengstenberg,  Authen.  pp.  277-288. 
In  reference  to  that  testimony,  the  following  remarks  may  be  made: — 
(1.)  The  authority  of  Josephus  is  entitled  to  great  credit,  and  his  testi- 
mony may  be  regarded  as  good  proof  of  a  historical  fact.  (2.)  There  is 
here  express  mention  of  "  the  Book  of  Daniel,"  as  a  book  existing  in  the 
time  of  Alexander,  and  as  shown  to  him,  in  Avhich  he  was  so  manifestly 
referred  to  that  he  at  once  recognised  the  allusion.  The  passages  re-  > 
fcrred  to  are  the  following:  ch.  vii.  G,  viii.  3-8,  21,  22,  xi.  3,  4.  For  the 
evidence  that  these  passages  relate  to  Alexander,  the  reader  is  referred 
to  the  Notes  on  them  respectively.  It  is  clear  that  if  they  were  read  to 
Alexander,  and  if  he  regarded  them  as  applying  to  himself,  he  could  not 
doubt  that  his  victory  over  the  Persians  would  be  certain.  (3.)  There  is 
every  probability  in  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  that,  if  the  Jewish 
high-priest  was  in  possession  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  at  that  time,  with  bo 
clear  a  reference  to  a  Grecian  conqueror,  he  would  show  those  passages 
to  him,  for  nothing  would  lie  more  likely  to  appease  his  wrath,  and  to 
obtain  protection  for  the  Jews  in  Jerusalem,  and  for  those  who  v/ere 
scattered  in  the  lands  wliere  it  was  manifest  that  he  purposed  to  extend 
his  conquests.  And  (4.)  it  may  be  presumed  that,  as  a  consequence  of 
this,  Alexander  would  grant  to  the  Jews  all  that  Josephus  says  that  he 
did.  The  best  way  of  accounting  for  the  fxvor  which  Josephus  says  he  did 
show  to  the  Jews,  is  the  fact  which  he  states,  that  these  predictions  were 
read  to  him  announcing  his  success  in  his  projected  wars.  Thus 
Josephus  says,  as  a  consequence  of  these  predictions  being  shown  to  him 
(Ant.,  nt  supra),  "  And  as  ho  was  then  glad,  he  dismissed  the  multitude  for 
the  present ;  but  the  next  day  he  called  them  to  him,  and  bade  them  ask 
what  favors  they  {^leased  of  him.  Accordingly  the  high-priest  desired 
that  they  might  enjoy  the  laws  of  their  forefathers,  and  might  pay  no 
tribute  the  seventh  year.  This  was  readily  granted.  And  when  they 
entreated  that  he  would  permit  the  Jews  in  Babylon  and  Media  to  enjoy 
their  own  laws  also,  he  willingly  promised  to  do  hereafter  what  they 
desired.  And  when  he  said  to  the  multitude,  that  if  any  of  them  would 
enlist  tliemselves  in  his  army,  on  the  condition  that  they  should  continue 
under  the  laws  of  their  forefathers,  and  live  according  to  them,  he  was 
willing  to  take  them  with  him,  many  were  ready  to  accompany  him  in 
his  wars." 

There  is  intrinsic  probability  that  this  account  in  Josephus  is  true,  and 
the  main  historical  facts,  as  stated  by  Josephus,  are  vouched  for  by  other 
writers.  "  That  Alexander  was  personally  in  Judea,  Pliny  testifies.  Hist. 
Nat.  xii.  2G.  That  Palestine  voluntarily  surrendered  to  him,  is  testified 
in  Arrian's  History  of  Alexander,  ii.  25.  That  he  was  met  by  the  high- 
priest  and  his  brethren  dressed  in  turbans,  is  testified  by  Justin  (xi.  10), 
who  says:  Obvios  cum  infalis  multos  orientis  regis  habuit."  See 
Stuart  on  Daniel,  p.  408. 

There    is,   therefore,    the    highest   degree   of   probability  that    this 


INTEODUCTIOX.  LIH 

narrative  of  Joseplius  is  true ;  and  if  this  is  a  correct  historical 
narrative,  then  it  is  clear  that  the  Book  of  Daniel,  containing,  in  respect 
to  the  conquests  of  Alexander,  the  same  passages  that  are  now  applied 
to  him,  was  in  existence  long  before  the  time  of  the  Macca))ees.  This 
occurred  in  332  B.  C,  and  if  this  account  is  correct,  then  "  the  Book  of 
Daniel,  as  it  now  exists,  was  current  among  the  Jews  as  a  sacred  book, 
at  least  some  1G8-170  years  before  the  time  when,  according  to  the  critics 
of  the  sceptical  school,  the  book  could  be  written." 

[b]  The  same  thing  may  be  inferred  from  a  passage  in  the  Apocrypha. 
In  1  Maccabees  ii.  49-G8,  the  dying  Mattathias  is  said,  in  an  exhortation  to 
his  sons  to  be  "  zealous  for  the  law,  and  to  give  their  lives  for  the  covenant 
of  their  fathers,"  to  have  referred  to  the  ancient  examples  of  piety  and 
fortitude  among  the  Ileljrews,  mentioning,  among  others,  Abraham, 
"  found  faithful  in  temptation  ;"  Joseph,  who  "  in  a  time  of  distress  kept 
the  commandments,  and  was  made  lord  of  Egj^pt;"  Joshua,  who  "for 
fulfilling  the  word  Avas  made  a  judge  in  Israel ;"  Caleb,  who  for  "  bearing 
witness  before  the  congregation  received  the  heritage  of  the  land  ;"  David, 
Elias,  Ananias,  Azarias,  and  Misael,  and  then  (ver.  GO)  he  mentions 
Daniel  in  these  words  :  "  Daniel  for  his  innocency  was  delivered  from  the 
mouth  of  lions."  Here  is  an  evident  reference  to  the  history  of  Daniel 
as  we  have  it  (ch.  vi.) ;  and  although  it  is  true  that  such  an  account 
viight  bo  handed  down  by  tradition,  and  that  such  a  reference  as  this 
might  be  made  if  thei'e  were  nothing  more  than  mere  tradition,  j-et  it 
is  also  true  that  this  is  such  a  reference  as  would  be  made  if  the  book 
were  in  existence  then  as  it  is  now,  and  true  also  that  the  other  references 
are,  mostly  at  least,  to  written  accounts  of  the  worthies  who  are  there 
mentioned.  If  there  were  no  positive  evidence  to  the  contrary,  the 
prima  facie  proof  in  this  quotation  would  be,  that  Mattathias  referred  to 
some  well-known  written  record  of  Daniel. 

(t)  The  fact  of  the  existence  of  the  book  before  the  time  of  the  Mac- 
cabees may  Ije  inferred  from  its  translation  by  the  authors  of  the 
Septuagint.  The  fact  that  the  book  was  translated  with  the  other  He- 
brow  and  Chaldeo  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  is  a  proof  that  it  had  an 
existence  at  an  early  period,  and  that  it  was  worth}-,  in  the  estimation  of 
the  translators,  of  a  place  among  the  sacred  books  of  the  Jews. 

(5.)  I  refer,  fifth,  in  proof  of  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the 
book,  to  the  laiiyuaye  in  which  it  is  written.  We  have  already  seen  that 
it  is  written  partly  in  lleljrew,  and  partly  in  Chaldee.  The  argument 
to  which  I  refer,  Irom  this  fact,  in  proof  of  the  genuineness  of  the  book, 
consists  of  the  fullowing  things : — 

(rt)  Tiie  language  is  such  as  it  might  be  expected  it  would  be  on  the 
supposition  that  Daniel  Avas  the  real  author.  Daniel  was  by  birth  a 
Hebrew.  He  was  probably  Ijorn  in  Jerusalem,  and  remained  there  until 
he  was  about  twelve  or  fifteen  years  of  age  (see  §  1),  when  he  was  re- 
moved to  Baiiylon.  In  his  youth,  tl  erefore,  he  had  used  the  Hebrew 
language,  and  his  early  education  had  been  in  that  language.  In  Baby- 
lon he  was  instructed  in  the  language  and  literature  of  tlie  Chaldeans, 
and  probably  became  as  familiar  with  the  language  of  the  Chaldeans 
as  he  was  with  his  native  tongue.  Both  these  languages  he  un- 
doubtedly spoke  familiarly,  and  probably  used  them  with  the  same 
degree  of  ease.  That  the  book,  therefore,  is  written  in  both  these 
5* 


LIV  INTRODUCTION. 

languages,  accords  Avith  this  representation ;  and,  if  written  by  ona 
man,  it  must  have  been  composed  by  one  Avho  was  thus  familiar  with 
both.  It  is  true  that  the  fact  that  Daniel  could  thus  speak  the  two 
languages  is  in  itself  no  proof  that  he  was  the  author ;  but  the  fact  that  it 
was  so  written  accords  with  the  circumstances  of  the  case.  His  early 
training,  and  the  fact  that  the  book  is  written  in  the  two  languages  with 
which  it  is  known  he  was  fixmiliar,  furnish  a  coincidence  such  as  would 
occur  on  the  supposition  that  he  was  the  author ;  and  a  coincidence,  like 
those  adverted  to  by  Dr.  Paley,  in  his  argument  in  favor  of  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  New  Testament  (Horae  Paulinas),  the  more  valuable  because 
it  is  clear  that  it  was  undesigned. 

But  ivhy  the  book  was  written  in  two  languages,  is  a  question  tliat  is 
not  so  easily  solved,  and  which  it  is  not  necessary  to  solve.  No  reason 
is  given  in  the  book  itself;  none  appears  from  anything  in  the  design  of 
the  portions  Avritten  respectively  in  Hebrew  and  Chaldee.  There  is 
nothing  apparent  in  these  portions  of  the  book  which  would  lead  us  to 
suppose  that  one  was  designed  to  be  read  by  the  Hebrews  and  the  other 
by  the  Chaldeans,  or  that,  as  it  is  often  affirmed  (comp.  Home,  Introduc- 
tion, vol.  iv.  p.  193)  that  one  portion  "  treats  of  the  Chaldean  or  Baby- 
lonish affairs."  There  is  no  particular  "  treatment"  of  the  Chaldean  or 
Babylonish  affairs,  for  example,  in  the  seventh  chapter,  where  the 
Chaldean  portion  ends,  any  more  than  in  the  eighth,  where  the  Hebrew 
is  resumed,  and,  in  fact,  no  internal  reason  can  be  assigned  why  one  of 
those  chapters  should  have  been  written  in  Chaldee  or  Hebrew  rather 
than  the  other  or  Ijoth.  Tiie  same  remark  is  applicable  to  the  first  and 
second  chapters,  and  indeed  to  every  portion  of  the  book ;  and  the  reason 
which  induced  the  author  to  write  different  portions  of  it  in  different 
languages  must  be  for  ever  unknown.  This  does  not,  however,  affect  the 
force  of  the  argument  which  I  am  suggesting. 

{b)  The  circumstance  now  adverted  to  may  be  regarded  as  of  some 
force  in  showing  that  it  is  not  probable  that  the  book  was  forged,  and 
especially  that  it  was  not  forged  in  the  time  of  the  Maccabees.  It  is  an 
unusual  thing  for  a  man  to  attempt  to  forge  a  book  in  two  languages  ; 
and  though  cases  have  occurred  in  great  numbei-s  where  a  man  could  so 
familiarly  write  in  two  languages  that  he  could  do  this,  yet  this  would 
not  be  likely  to  occur  in  the  time  of  the  Maccabees.  It  was  probably  a 
very  uncommon  thing  at  that  time  that  a  man  was  so  familiar  with  the 
two  languages  that  he  could  write  readily  in  each,  for  there  are  no 
writings  extant  in  cither  of  these  languages  in  that  age ;  and  it  is  well 
known  that  the  Hebrew  language  became  greatly  adulterated  by  foreign 
admixtures  soon  after  the  return  from  the  exile,  and  never  regained  the 
purity  which  it  had  in  the  early  periods  of  its  history. 

(c)  To  these  considerations  it  may  be  added,  that  if  the  book  was 
written  in  the  times  of  the  Maccabees,  or  at  a  later  period,  there  is  every 
reason  to  suppose  that  it  would  have  been  written  in  the  Greek  language. 
This  appears  from  the  fact  that  all  the  books  which  we  have  of  that  age 
are  written  in  Greek,  and  that  the  Greek  at  that  time  had  become  so  pre- 
valent that  it  would  be  natural  that  it  should  be  used.  Thus  all  the 
books  of  the  Apocrypha,  and  those  parts  which  profess  to  be  additions 
to  the  Book  of  Daniel,  as  the  Song  of  the  Three  Holy  Children,  the  His- 
tory of  Susanna,  and  the  Destruction  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  are  found 


INTRODUCTION.  LV 

only  in  Greek,  and  there  is  no  evidence  that  they  were  ever  written  in 
Hebrew  or  Chaldce.  See  ?  4  of  this  Introduction.  If  the  Book  of 
Daniel  itself  was  written  in  that  age,  Avhy  was  not  it  also  written  in 
Greek?  Or  why  should  the  book,  as  we  have  it  now,  if  it  were  a  forged 
book,  have  been  written  in  Hebrew  and  Chaldeo,  and  those  other  portions, 
which  the  author  seems  to  have  designed  should  be  regarded  as  belonging 
to  the  book,  have  been  Avritten  in  Greek  ?  There  are  none  of  the  books 
of  the  Apocrypha  of  which  there  is  any  evidence  that  they  were  written 
in  Hebrew  or  Chaldee,  The  only  one  of  those  books  for  which  such 
a  claim  has  been  set  up  is  the  Book  of  Ecclesiasticus.  That  is  affirmed  by 
the  Son  of  Sirach  (see  the  Prologue),  to  have  been  written  originally  by 
his  grandfather  in  Hebrew,  and  to  have  been  translated  by  himself  into 
Greek.  But  the  Hebrew  original  is  not  in  existence ;  nor  is  there  any 
certain  evidence  that  it  ever  was.  It  is  an  additional  circumstance, 
showing  that  a  book  of  the  Maccabaean  age  would  have  been  written  in 
Greek,  that  even  Berosus,  who  was  himself  a  Chaldean,  wrote  his  history 
of  Chaldea  in  Greek.     See  Intro,  to  ch.  iv.  ^  1. 

To  all  these  considerations,  which  seem  to  me  of  themselves  to  settle 
the  question,  I  may  be  permitted  to  add  a  very  ingenious  argument 
of  Prof.  Stuart,  in  his  own  words ;  an  argument  which,  I  think,  no  one 
can  answer.     Com.  on  Daniel,  pp.  438-44'J. 

"  The  accurate  knowledge,  which  the  writer  of  the  Book  of  Daniel 
displays,  of  ancient  history,  manners  and  customs,  and  Oriental-Baby- 
lonish peculiarities,  shows  that  he  must  have  lived  at  or  near  the  time 
and  place,  when  and  where  the  book  leads  us  to  suppose  that  he  lived. 

"  A  great  variety  of  particulars  might  be  adduced  to  illustrate  and 
confirm  this  proposition ;  but  I  aim  only  to  introduce  the  leading  and 
more  striking  ones. 

"  (a)  In  drawing  the  character  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  giving  some 
brighter  spots  to  it,  Daniel  agrees  with  hints  of  the  like  nature  in  Jer. 
xlii.  12,  xxxix.  11.  If  a  writer  in  the  Maccabaean  age  had  undertaken,  as 
is  asserted,  to  symbolize  Antiochus  Epiphanes  by  drawing  the  character 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  it  would  be  difficult  to  conceive  how  he  would  have 
been  persuaded  to  throw  into  the  picture  these  mellower  tints. 

"  (6)  In  drawing  the  portrait  of  Belshazzar,  the  last  king  of  Babylon, 
Daniel  agrees  very  strikingly  with  Xenophon.  In  this  latter  writer,  he 
appears  as  a  debauched,  pleasure-loving,  cruel,  and  impious  monarch. 
Cyrop.  iv.  v.  represents  him  as  killing  the  son  of  Gobryas,  one  of  his 
nobles,  because  he  had  anticipated  him,  while  hunting,  in  striking  down 
the  game.  When  the  father  remonstrated,  he  replied,  that  he  was  sorry 
only  that  he  had  not  killed  him  also.  In  Lib.  v.  2,  he  is  styled  haughty 
and  abusive.  One  of  his  concubines  spoke  in  praise  of  Gadates,  a 
courtier,  as  a  handsome  man.  The  king  invited  him  to  a  banquet,  and 
there  caused  him  to  be  seized  and  unmanned.  It  is  all  in  keeping  with 
this,  when  he  appears  in  Daniel  v.  In  his  intoxication  and  pride,  he 
orders  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  Jerusalem-temple  to  be  profoned ;  and 
Daniel  is  so  disgusted  with  his  behaviour,  that  he  does  not,  as  in  the  case 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  (chap,  iv.),  disclose  any  strong  sympathy  for  him,  but 
denounces  unqualified  destruction.     Xenophon  calls  this  king,  avoaioi. 

"  (c)  Cyaxares  {Darius  the  Mede  in  Dan.)  is  drawn  by  Xenophon  a& 
devoted  to  wino  and  women  (Cyrop.  iv.).     In  Dan.  vi.  19,  it  is  mentioned 


i,VI  INTRODUCTION. 

of  Darius,  as  an  extraordinary  thing,  that  after  he  saw  the  supposed  rum 
of  Daniel,  he  neither  approached  liia  table  or  his  harem.  Xenophon 
speaks  of  him  as  indolent,  averse  to  business,  of  small  understanding, 
vain,  without  self-restraint,  and  easily  thrown  into  tears ;  and  then, 
moreover,  as  subject  to  violent  outbursts  of  passion  (iv.  v.).  In  Daniel 
he  appears  as  wholly  governed  by  his  courtiers  ;  they  flatter  his  vanity 
and  obtain  the  decree  intended  to  destroy  Daniel.  Daniel's  supposed 
impending  fote  throws  him  into  lamentation,  and  he  betakes  himself  to 
fasting  and  vigils ;  and  when  he  learns  the  safety  of  his  Hebrew  servant, 
he  sentences  his  accusers,  with  all  their  wives  and  children,  to  be  thrown 
into  the  lions'  den,  vi.  18-24. 

"  Now  as  there  was  no  history  of  these  times  and  kings  among  the  < 
Hebrews,  and  none  among  the  Greeks  that  gave  any  minute  particulars,  * 
in  what  way  did  a  late  writer  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  obtain  his  know- 
ledge ? 

"  {d)  When  in  Dan.  i.  21,  it  is  stated  that  Daniel  continued  until  the 
first  year  of  C>jriis,  without  any  specification  when  this  was,  the  Avriter 
seems  plainly  to  suppose  his  readers  to  be  fxmiliar  with  this  period.  It 
is  true,  that  from  the  Book  of  Ezra  a  knowledge  of  that  time,  the  period 
of  Jewish  liberation,  might  be  gained  ;  but  the  familiar  manner  of  the 
reference  to  it,  indicates  that  the  writer  feels  himself  to  bo  addressing 
those  who  were  cognizant  of  matters  pertaining  to  the  period. 

"  (e)  In  ch.  i.  and  ii.  we  are  told  that  king  Nebuchadnezzar  besieged 
Jerusalem,  took  it,  and  sent  Daniel  and  his  companions  to  Babylon. 
There  they  were  taken  under  the  care  and  instruction  of  learned  men 
among  the  Chaldees,  and  trained  up  for  the  personal  service  of  the  king. 
The  period  of  training  was  three  years.  At  the  close  of  this,  they  were 
examined  and  approved  by  the  king ;  and  soon  after  this  occurred 
Nebuchadnezzar's  first  dream,  which  Daniel  was  summoned  to  interpret. 
This  dream  is  said  to  be  in  the  second  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  reign. 
Here  then  is  an  apparent  parachronism.  How  could  Daniel  have  been 
taken  and  sent  into  exile  by  king  Nebuchadnezzar,  educated  tliree  years, 
and  then  be  called  to  interpret  a  dream  in  the  second  year  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's reign  ?  The  solution  of  this  difiiculty  I  have  already  exhibited 
in  an  Exc.  at  the  end  of  the  commentary  on  ch.  i.  I  need  not  repeat  the 
jprocess  here.  It  amounts  simply  to  this,  viz.,  that  Nebuchadnezzar  is 
called  king  in  Dan.  i.  1,  hj  ivafj  of  anticipation ;  a  usage  followed  by 
Kings,  Chron.,  and  Jeremiah.  Before  he  quitted  Judea  he  became 
actual  king  by  the  death  of  his  father ;  and  the  Jews,  in  speaking  of  him 
as  commanding  the  invading  army,  always  called  him  king.  But  in 
Dan.  ii.  1,  Nebuchadnezzar  is  spoken  of  in  the  Chaldee  mode  of  reference 
to  his  actual  reign.  This  leaves  some  four  years  for  Daniel's  discipline 
and  service.  But  to  those  who  were  not  familiar  with  the  Jewish  mode 
of  speaking  in  respect  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  it  would  naturally  and 
inevitably  appear  like  a  parachronism,  or  even  a  downright  contradiction 
of  dates.  Yet  the  writer  has  not  a  word  of  explanation  to  make.  IIo 
evidently  feels  as  if  all  were  plain  to  his  readers  ;  (as  doubtless  it  was) 
But  a  writer  of  the  Maccabaean  age  would  plainly  have  seen  and  avoided 
the  difficulty. 

"  [f)  In  Dan.  v.  30,  it  is  stated  that  Belshazzar  was  slain ;  but  not  a 
word  is  said  descriptive  of  the  manner  in  which  this  was  brought  abouti 


INTRODUCTION.  LVIl 

nor  even  that  the  city  of  Babylon  was  taken.  The  next  verse  simply 
mentions  that  Darius  the  Mede  took  the  kingdom.  All  this  brevity  seems 
to  imply,  that  the  writer  supposed  those  -whom  he  was  addressing  to  bo 
cogiiizmt  of  the  whole  matter.  Had  he  lived  in  the  Maccabcan  age, 
would  he  have  written  thus  respecting  events  so  interesting  and  im- 
oortant? — In  like  manner  Dan.  x.  1,  seq.  tells  us,  that  in  the  third  year 
of  Cyrus,  Daniel  mourned  and  fasted  three  weeks.  But  not  a  word  is 
said  to  explain  the  occasion  of  this  peculiar  and  extraordinary  humili- 
ation. If  Ave  turn  now  to  Ezra  iv.  1-5,  we  shall  find  an  account  of  a 
combination  among  the  enemies  of  the  Jews  to  hinder  the  building  of 
the  city  Avails,  Avhich  was  successful,  and  which  took  place  in  the  iliird 
year  of  Cyrus'  reign,  i.  e.  the  same  year  with  Daniel's  mourning.  There 
can  scarcely  bo  a  doubt  that  this  was  the  occasion  of  that  mourning;  for 
certainly  it  Avas  no  ritual,  legal,  or  ordinary  fast.  The  manner  now  in 
which  ch.  X.  is  Avritten,  plainly  imports  that  the  Avriter  feels  no  need  of 
giving  explanations.  He  takes  it  for  granted  that  his  readers  Avill  at 
once  perceive  the  Avhole  extent  of  the  matter.  But  hoAV,  in  the  Macca- 
baean  age,  could  a  Avriter  suppose  this  knowledge  within  the  grasp  of 
bis  readers? 

"  ig)  In  Dan.  ii.,  the  dream  is  interpi-eted  as  indicating  the  destruction 
of  tiie  Babylonish  empire  l)y  the  Medo-Persians.  Abydeniis,  in  hia 
singular  account  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  last  hours  (giA-en  on  p.  122  aboA^e), 
represents  this  king  as  rapt  into  a  kind  of  prophetic  ecstas}',  and  in  this 
state  as  declaring  his  fearful  anticipations  of  the  Medo-Persian  conquest. 
HoAV  came  such  a  coincidence? 

"  (/i)  In  iA\  27,  Nebuchadnezzar  is  introduced  as  saying:  "  Is  not  this 
great  Bab^don  which  I  have  built  ?  Recent  critics  allege  tiiis  to  be  a 
mistake.  '  Ctesias,'  they  tell  us,  'attributes  the  building  of  Babylon  to 
Semir amis  (Biihr  Ctes.  p.  3'J7,  seq.),  and  Herodotus  (i.  ISl,  seq.)  ascribes 
it  to  S-'miramis  and  Nitocris.' — My  ansAver  is,  that  Ctesias  IoUoavs  the 
Assyrian  tradition,  and  Herodotus  the  Persian.  But  Berosus  and  Aby- 
denus  give  us  the  Babi/luiiiaa  account ;  Avhich  is,  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
added  much  to  the  old  toAvn,  Imilt  a  magnificent  royal  palace,  surrounded 
the  city  Avith  ncAv  Avails,  and  adorned  it  with  a  vast  number  of  buildings. 
Well  and  truly  might  he  say  that  he  had  built  it,  meaning  (as  he  plainly 
did)  its  magnificent  structures.  It  Avas  not  any  falsehood  in  his  declara- 
tion, Avhich  Avas  visited  Avith  speedy  chastisement,  Imt  the  pride  and  vain- 
glory of  bis  boasting  gave  ofi'enca  to  lieaven.  But  hoAv  came  a  Avriter  of 
the  Maccabaean  period  to  knoAv  of  all  this  matter?  No  Greek  Avriter  has 
told  anything  about  Nebuchadnezzar  or  his  doings.  To  Berosus  and 
Abydenus,  a  Avriter  of  the  Maccabaean  age  could  hardly  haA-e  had  access. 
Herodotus  and  Ctesias  told  another  and  different  story.  Whence  then 
did  he  get  his  knowledge  of  the  part  Avhich  Nebuchadnezzar  had  acted, 
in  the  Ijuikling  of  the  city?  And  yet  the  account  of  it  in  Daniel  accords 
entirely  Avith  both  Berosus  and  Abydenus.  Even  the  account  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar's madness  is  virtually  adverted  to  in  these  Avriters  ;  see  above, 
p.  122,  seq. 

"((')  In  Dan.  v.  10-12,  is  introduced  a  personage  styled  the  queen, 
not  because  she  aams  Belshazzar's  Avife,  for  the  latter  aams  already  in  the 
banqueting-room  (v.  3,  23),  but  probably  because  she  Avas  a  queen- 
mother.    Not  improbi?-blj  this  Avas  the  Nitocris  of  Herodotus ;  and  BerosuSj 


LVIII  INTRODUCTION. 

Diod.  Sic.  (ii  10),  and  Alex.  Polyliist.  (in  Chron.  Armen.),  all  say  thai 
Nitocris  was  a  ■wife  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  If  so,  she  might  have  had  much 
to  do  \Yith  ornamenting  the  city  both  before  and  after  Nebuchadnezzar's 
death  ;  and  this  will  account  fur  the  great  deference  paid  to  her  by  Bel- 
hhazzar,  as  related  in  v.  10-12.  It  is  one  of  those  accidental  circum- 
stances, which  speaks  much  for  the  accordance  of  Daniel  with  the 
narrations  of  history.  It  is,  moreover,  a  circumstance,  about  which  a 
writer  of  the  Maccabaean  age  cannot  well  be  supposed  to  have  known 
anything. 

"And  since  we  are  now  examining  ch.  v.,  it  may  be  proper  to  note 
another  circumstance.  "We  have  seen,  that  at  Babylon  the  wives  and 
concubines  of  the  king  were,  without  any  scruple,  present  at  the  feast. 
But  in  Esth.  i.  we  have  an  account  of  the  positive  refusal  of  Queen  Vashti 
to  enter  the  guest-chamber  of  Ahasuerus.  In  other  words,  this  was,  and 
is,  aga  nst  the  general  custom  of  the  East.  How  came  a  writt  r  of  the 
Macca'jaean  period  to  know  this  distinction  between  the  customs  of 
Babylon  and  of  Persia  ?  The  author  of  the  Sept.  Version,  a  contemporary 
of  this  period,  knows  so  little  of  such  a  matter  that  he  even  leaves  out  the 
passage  respecting  the  presence  of  women  at  the  feast.  Why  ?  Plainly 
because  ho  thought  this  matter  would  be  deemed  incredible  by  his  readers. 
In  Xen.  Cj-rop.  (V.  2.  28),  is  an  account  of  a  fuast  of  Belshazzar,  Avhcro 
his  concubines  are  represented  as  being  present.  Not  only  so,  but  we 
have  elsewhere,  in  Greek  and  Iloman  writers,  abundant  testimony  to 
usages  of  this  kind,  in  their  accounts  of  tiie  Babylonish  excesses.  But 
how  comes  it  about,  that  the  forger  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  whose  fami- 
liarity with  those  writings  is  not  credible,  should  know  so  much  more  of 
Babylonish  customs  than  the  Sept.  transhxtor? 

"  [j)  Of  the  manner  in  which  Bibylon  was  taken,  and  Belshazzar  slain, 
Daniel  has  not  given  us  any  minulc  particulars.  But  he  has  told  us  tliat 
the  Mcda  and  Ftrsians  acquired  the  dominion  of  Babylon  (v.  28),  and 
that  Darius  the  Mede  succeeded  Belshazzar.  The  manner  in  wliich  ho 
announces  the  slaying  of  Belshazzar  (v.  30),  shows  that  the  event  Avaa 
altogether  sudden  and  unexpected.  Now  Herodotus  in  (I.  190),  and 
Xenophon  (Cyrop.  VII.),  have  told  us,  that  Cyrus  diverted  the  waters  of 
the  Euphrates,  and  marched  in  its  channel  into  the  heart  of  Babylon, 
and  took  the  city  in  a  single  night.  They  tell  us  that  the  Babylonians 
were  in  the  midst  of  feast-rioting  that  night,  and  were  unprepared  to 
meet  the  enemy  who  were  not  expected  in  the  city.  How  entirely  all 
this  harmonizes  with  Daniel,  is  quite  plain.  Gesenius  himself  acknow- 
ledges that  this  is  sehr  atiJJ'aUend,  i.  o.  very  striking.  Ho  has  even 
acknowledged,  in  a  moment  of  more  than  usual  candor  and  concession, 
that  Isa.  xiiv.  27,  has  a  definite  reference  to  the  stratagem  of  Cyrus  in 
taking  the  city.  In  connection  with  a  prediction  concerning  Cyrus, 
Jehovah  is  hero  represented  as  "  saying  to  the  deep,  Be  dry ;  yea,  1  will 
dry  vp  thy  rivers."  So  in  Jer.  1.  38,  "  A  drought  is  upon  her  waters,  ami 
they  shall  be  dried  up  ;"  and  again,  li.  30,  "  I  will  dry  up  her  sea  [river], 
and  make  her  springs  dry."  If  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  to  be  cast  out  as  ;v 
late  production,  and  as  spurious,  because  it  seems  to  predict  the  sudden 
capture  of  Babylon  in  one  night,  by  the  Modes  and  Persians,  what  is  to 
tie  done  with  these  passages  of  tsa.  and  Jer.  ?  Even  the  Neologists, 
fclthough  they  maintain  a  later  composition  in  respect  to  these  parts  of 


INTRODUCTION.  LIX 

tho  prophets  -which  have  just  been  cited,  still  do  not  venture  to  place  that 
•jomposition  post  evenium.  If  not,  then  there  is  prediction  ;  and  this,  too, 
of  a  strange  event,  and  one  so  minute  and  specific,  that  guessiiifi  is  out  of 
question.  If,  then,  Isa.  and  Jer.  predicted,  why  might  not  a  Daniel  also 
predict  / 

"  Another  circumstance  there  is  also,  in  which  all  three  of  these  pro- 
phots  are  agreed.  According  to  Dan.  vi.,  Babylon  was  feasting  and 
carousing,  on  the  night  of  its  capture.  In  Isa.  xxi.  5,  we  have  the  like : 
*  Prepare  tha  table  .  .  .  Eat,  drink ;  arise,  ye  princes,  and  anoint  the 
shield,'  i.  e  ribO  up  from  your  feast-table,  and  make  ready  for  assault. 
So  Jer.  li.  39,  '  I  will  prepare  their  feasts,  and  I  will  make  them  drunken, 
that  they  may  rejoice,  and  sleep  a  perpetual  sleep,  and  not  wake,  saith 
the  Lord.' 

"If  now  a  writer  of  the  Maccabaean  period  had  undertaken  to  write 
the  ytory  of  the  capture  of  Babylon,  is  there  any  probability  that  he 
would  have  hit  upon  all  these  circumstances,  so  peculiar  and  so  con- 
cordant ?  Conversant  with  the  native  Greek  historians  we  cannot  well 
suppose  him  to  have  been  ;  for  Greek  literature  was  regarded  as  reproach- 
ful by  the  Jews  of  that  period,  and  even  down  to  the  time  of  Josephus, 
who  speaks  strongly  on  this  subject. 

"  (/c)  Daniel  v.  oO,  relates  the  violent  death  of  Belshazzar,  when  the  city 
was  taken.  In  this  particular  he  is  vouched  for  by  Xenophon,  Cyrop. 
VII.  V.  24,  30.  So  do  Isa.  xxi.  2-9,  xiv.  18-20 ;  Jer.  1.  29-35,  li.  57, 
declare  the  same  thing.  But  here  Berosus  and  Abydenus  dissent,  both 
of  them  representing  the  Babylonish  king  as  surrendering,  and  as  being 
treated  humanely  by  Cyrus.  How  comes  it,  if  the  forger  of  the  Book  of 
Daniel  wrote  about  B.  C.  IGO,  that  he  did  not  consult  those  authors  on 
Babylonish  aflairs?  Or  if  (as  was  surely  the  fact  in  regai-d  to  most 
Jewish  writers  at  that  period),  he  had  no  familiarity  with  Greek  authors, 
then  where  did  he  obtain  his  views  about  the  death  of  Belshazzar?  For 
a  full  discission  of  this  matter,  see  p.  147,  seq.,  above.  There  can 
scarcely  be  a  doubt,  that  the  account  of  Daniel  and  Xenophon  is  the 
true  one. 

"  Xenophon  relates,  that  the  party  which  assailed  the  palace,  who  were 
led  on  by  Gobryas  and  Gadatas,  fell  upon  the  guards  who  were  carous- 
ing, Tpdf  <!>^:  noXv^  i.  e.  at  broad  daylight ;-  Cyro.  VII.  5.  27.  In  other 
words,  the  Persians  did  not  accomplish  their  onset  upon  the  palace,  until 
the  night  was  far  spent,  and  daylight  was  dawning.  How  now  are 
matters  presented  in  the  Book  of  Daniel.  First,  there  is  the  feast,  (of 
course  in  the  evening)  ;  then  the  quaffing  of  wine ;  then  the  hand-writing 
on  the  wall ;  then  the  assembling  of  all  the  Magi  to  interpret  it ;  then  tho 
introduction  of  Daniel,  whose  interpretation  was  followed  by  his  being 
clothed  with  the  insignia  of  nobility,  and  being  proclaimed  the  third  ruler 
in  the  kingdom.  All  this  must  of  course  have  taken  up  most  of  the  night. 
Here,  then,  one  writer  confirms  and  illustrates  the  other.  A  Pseudo- 
Daniel  would  not  have  risked  such  a  statement  as  the  true  one  has 
made ;  for  at  first  view,  the  matter  seems  incredible,  and  it  is  chai-ged 

"*■  Singular,  that  in  a  critical  edition  and  commentary  on  Xenophon,  now  before  me,  this  is 
•endereU  Lifure  a  good  fire.  First,  the  (irepk  words  do  not  allow  this.  Secondly,  the  Baby- 
lonians need  and  have  no  fires  for  warmth.  Thirdly,  Cyrus  would  not  have  drained  the 
Kuphrates,  and  marched  bis  army  in  its  channel,  at  a  time  when  fires  were  needed  fo/ 
varmth. 


fix  INTRODUCTION. 

upon   the  book  as   such.     But  Xcnophon  has  freed  it  from  {.11  diffi' 
culties. 

"  Dan.  vi.  also  declares,  that  Belshazzar  was  a  son,  i.  o.  a  descendant 
of  Nebuchadnezzar.  An  appeal  is  made  to  Berosus  and  Mcgasthenes,  to 
Bhow  that  this  Avas  not  true.  Yet  they  do  not  so  testify,  but  only  that 
Belshazzar  was  not  of  the  regular  line  of  heirs  of  the  throne.  He 
might  still  have  been  a  younger  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  or  a  son  of 
Neouchadnezzar's  daughter.  Now  Herodotus  agrees  with  Daniel,  i.  188, 
i.  74.  So  does  Xenophon.  And  as  the  othJir  authors  have  not  in  reality 
contradicted  this,  what  reason  is  there  for  refusing  to  believe  ?  See  the 
discussion  of  this  topic  at  large,  p.  144,  seq. 

"  It  certainly  deserves  to  bo  noted,  that,  in  part,  the  Book  of  Daniel  ia 
on  the  side  of  the  Greek  writers,  and  against  Berosus  and  Abydenus,  ' 
where  the  representations  of  the  latter  may  be  justly  regarded  as 
designed  to  save  the  honor  and  credit  of  the  Babylonians ;  in  part  also 
is  Daniel  on  the  side  of  the  latter,  and  against  the  Greek  writers, 
i.  e.,  in  cases  where  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  the  native  historians 
to  be  partial.  The  media  via  appears  in  this  case  to  be  hit  upon,  by 
the  simple  pursuit  of  historical  truth  in  the  narratives  of  the  book 
before  us. 

"Again,  in  Dan.  v.  31,  we  have  an  assurance,  that  Darius  the  Mecle 
assumed  the  throne  of  Babylon.  Here  Herodotus  and  Ctesias  are 
silent ;  but  here  Xenophon  fully  confirms  the  account  given  by  Daniel. 
Herodotus  himself  states  (i.  95),  that  there  were  two  other  modes  of 
telling  the  story  of  Cyrus,  besides  that  which  he  follows ;  and  that  of 
Xenophon  and  Daniel  is  probably  one  of  these.  This  is  confirmed  by 
Is.  xiii.  17,  where  the  Mede  is  declared  to  be  the  leading  nation  in 
destroying  Babylon,  and  the  same  is  also  said  in  Jer.  liii.  11,  28.  In 
Is.  xxi.  2,  both  Media  and  Persia  are  mentioned.  The  silence  of  Hero- 
dotus and  Ctesias  can  not  disprove  a  matter  of  this  kind.  See  a  full  dis- 
cussion of  the  topic,  p.  148,  seq, 

"  Dan.  vi.  1  states,  that  Darius  set  over  his  kingdom  120  satraps. 
Xenophon  (Cyrop.  YIII.  G,  1  seq.)  relates,  that  satraps  were  set  over  all 
the  conquered  nations,  when  Cyrus  was  in  Babylon.  He  speaks  of  the 
appointments  as  made  by  Cyrus ;  and  doubtless  they  were,  since  he  was 
the  only  acting  governor  of  Bab,>lon,  and  vice-gerent  of  the  king.  No 
less  true  is  it,  that  to  Darius  also,  as  supreme,  may  the  appointment  be 
attributed.  How  came  the  alleged  Za^e  writer  of  Daniel  to  know  this? 
Xenophon  mentions  no  express  number.  The  Book  of  Esther  (i.  1)  men- 
tions 127  satraps.  Why  did  not  our  late  writer  copy  that  number  in  order 
to  remove  suspicion  as  to  so  great  a  number  of  those  high  ofiicers  ?  And 
how  is  it  that  120  in  Daniel  is  objected  to  as  an  incredible  number,  when 
the  empire  was  actually  as  large  at  the  time  of  their  appointment,  as  it 
was  in  the  time  of  Xerxes,  as  exhibited  in  Esth.  i.  1  ?  The  Septuagint 
translator  of  Daniel,  who  belonged  to  the  JMaccabaean  age,  did  not  venture 
to  write  120,  as  it  seems,  but  127  (so  in  Cod.  Chis.),  thus  according  with 
Esth.  i.  1,  and  leaning  upon  that  passage.  He  seems  evidently  to  have 
felt  that  the  story  of  so  many  satrapies  must  be  supported  by  the  Book 
of  Esther,  in  order  to  be  believed.  He  even,  in  his  ignorance  of  history, 
liranslates  v.  31  thus:  'And  Artaxerxes,  the  Mede,  took  the  kingdom,' 
{probably  iioeaning  the  Persian  Artaxerxes  Longimanus. 


INTRODUCTION.  LXl 

*'  (?)  It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  the  order  of  the  tvrc  nations,  MedeS 
and  Persians,  is  to  be  found  in  strict  accordance  with  the  idiom  of  the 
times.  Thus  in  vi.  8,  12,  15,  we  liave  the  Medcs  and  Persians ;  but  after 
Cyrus  comes  to  the  throne,  the  order  is  invariably  Persians  and  Meles 
So  in  the  Book  of  Esther,  the  law  of  the  Persians  and  Medcs  shows  the 
same  change  of  xisiis  loqiiendi.  Would  a  Pseudo-Daniel  have  been  likely 
CO  note  sucli  a  small  cii-cumstance? 

"It  is  also  noted  (Dan.  v.  31),  that  when  Darius  took  the  kingdom,  he 
was  threescore  and  two  years  old.  From  Jus  liistory,  his  reign,  and  his 
descent  from  Ahasuerus  (ix.  1),  this  seems  altogether  probable.  But  no 
other  author  states  his  age.  Tlie  fact  that  it  is  done  in  Daniel,  betokens 
a  familiarity  of  the  wi'iter  with  the  miniiiice  of  his  history.  So  does  the 
mention,  that  in  i\\Qjirst  year  of  liis  reign,  Daniel  took  into  most  serious 
consideration  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah,  respecting  the  seventy  years' 
exile  of  the  Hebrews. 

"  Thus  far,  then,  all  is  well.  All  seems  to  bo  in  conformity  witli  true 
history,  so  far  as  we  can  ascertain  it.  It  is  not  upon  one  or  two  particu- 
lars that  we  would  lay  stress.  AVc  acknowledge  that  these  might  have 
been  traditionally  known,  and  accurately  reported.  It  is  on  the  tout  en- 
semble of  the  historical  matters  contained  in  the  book,  that  stress  is  to  be 
laid.  And  certainly  it  would  be  very  singular,  if  all  these  circumstances 
should  be  true  and  consistent,  and  yet  the  book  be  written  in  the  Mac- 
cabaean  period. 

"  IIow  is  it  with  the  best  historical  books  of  that  period  ?  The  first 
Book  of  the  Maccabees  is,  in  the  main,  a  trustworthy  and  veracious 
book.  But  how  easy  it  is  to  detect  errors  in  it,  both  in  respect  to 
geography  and  history !  In  vii.  7  it  is  related  that  the  Romans  took 
Antiochus  the  Great  prisoner  alive.  But  this  never  happened.  They 
gained  a  great  victory  over  him,  and  took  away  many  of  his  provinces  ; 
but  he  himself  escaped  their  grasp.  In  vii.  8  it  is  said,  that  they  took 
from  him  the  land  of  India,  Media,  and  Lydia.  But  neither  India 
nor  Media  ever  belonged  to  him.  The  efi'orts  to  show  that  IMysia  was 
originally  written  instead  of  Media,  are  of  course  but  mere  guesses ; 
and  if  true,  India  still  remains.  More  likely  is  it  that  the  author  him- 
self put  ISIedia  for  Mysia,  and  if  so,  then  this  does  not  mend  the  matter. 
In  vii.  9,  10,  it  is  related,  that  'the  Greeks  resolved  to  send  an  army  to 
Rome  and  destroy  it ;  but  that  the  Romans  learning  this,  sent  forth  an 
army,  who  slew  many,  carried  away  numerous  captives  of  their  women 
and  children,  laid  hold  of  their  strong  places,  and  took  possession  of 
their  lands,  and  reduced  the  people  of  Syria  to  servitude  vnto  this  dai/.' 
Now  nothing  of  all  this  ever  happened.  There  was  indeed  a  fracas 
between  the  Aetolians  and  the  Romans  at  that  period;  but  it  was  soon 
made  up,  without  any  ravages  of  war,  or  any  servitude.  Further,  the 
author,  in  vii.  15,  represents  the  Roman  Senate  as  consisting  of  320 
members,  continually  administei'ing  tlic  goVernment.  He  goes  on  to 
state  {v.  IG),  that  they  choose  a  ruler  annually,  and  that  all  obey  this 
one.  Every  tyro  in  Roman  history  knows  how  unfounded  all  this 
is.  And  what  shall  we  say  of  the  very  first  sentence  in  the  book, 
which  tells  us,  that  Alexander,  the  son  of  Philip,  smote  Darius,  king  of 
the  Persians  and  Medes,  and  then  reigned  iji  his  stead  over  Greece? 
In  i.  6,  ho  states  that  the  same  Alexander,  about  to  die,  made  a  partition 
6 


tXn  INTRODUCTION. 

of  his  empire  among  his  chiefs — a  thing  that  took  place  some  consider 
able  time  afterwards,  partly  by  mutual  agreement,  and  partly  by  force. 
In  vi.  1  he  makes  Elymais^.a  town  instead  of  a  province. 

"Such  aro  some  of  the  specimens  of  this  ■writer's  errors  in  geography 
and  history.  That  he  was  a  grave,  enlightened,  and  veracious  writer, 
in  the  main,  is  conceded  by  all.  But  if  in  things  so  plain,  and  transac* 
lions  so  recent,  he  commits  so  many  errors  as  have  been  specified, 
what  would  he  have  done,  if  the  scene  had  been  shifted  from  near  coun- 
tries to  the  remote  places  where  the  Book  of  Daniel  finds  its  circle  of 
action  ? 

"  As  to  the  second  Book  of  the  Maccabees,  it  is  so  notorious  for  errors 
and  mistakes,  that  very  little  credit  has  been  attached  to  it,  on  the  part 
of  intelligent  critics.  It  is  not  once  to  be  named,  in  comparison  with 
the  Book  of  Daniel.  It  must  have  been  written,  when  a  knowledge  of 
historical  events  was  confused,  and  at  a  very  low  ebb.  The  Book  of 
Tobit,  which  originated  in  or  near  the  Maccabaean  period,  exhibits  not 
only  a  romantic,  and,  as  it  were,  fairy  tale,  but  contains  historical  and 
geographical  difficulties  incapable  of  solution  ;  also  physical  phenomena 
are  brought  to  view,  which  are  incredible.  It  is  needless  to  specificate 
them  here.     Do  Wette's  Einleit.  presents  them,  §  309. 

"We  have  dwelt  hitherto,  under  our  5th  head,  mainly  on  things  of  a 
Tiisiorical  nature,  i.  e.  events  and  occurrences.  Let  us  now  examine  a 
number  of  things  that  are  of  a  miscellaneous  nature,  which  it  Avould  be 
somewhat  difiicult  if  not  useless  to  classify  throughout,  but  most  of  which 
are  connected  with  manners,  customs,  demeanor,  etc. 

"  (?«)  Daniel  makes  no  mention  in  his  book  of  prostration  before  the 
king,  in  addressing  him.  O  king,  live  for  ever  !  was  the  usual  greeting. 
Arrian  (iv.)  testifies,  that  the  story  in  the  East  was,  that  Cyrus  was  the 
first  before  whom  prostration  was  practised.  It  is  easy  to  see  how  this 
came  about.  "With  the  Persians,  the  king  was  regarded  as  the  represen- 
tative of  Ormusd,  and  therefore  entitled  to  adoration.  Nebuchadnezzar 
was  high  enough  in  claims  to  submission  and  honour;  but  not  a  word  of 
exacting  adoration  from  those  who  addressed  him.  How  could  a  Pseudo- 
Daniel  know  of  this  nice  distinction,  when  all  the  Oriental  sovereigns  of 
whom  he  had  any  knowledge  had,  at  least  for  four  centuries,  exacted 
prostration  from  all  who  approached  them  ? 

"  (/i)  In  mere  prose  (Dan.  i.  2),  Babylon  is  called  by  the  old  name, 
Shinar  (Gen.  xi.  2,  xiv.  1)  ;  and  as  an  old  name,  it  is  poetically  used 
once  by  Isaiah  (xi.  11),  and  once  by  Zechariah  (v.  11).  Now  ~SMnar 
was  the  vernacular  name  of  what  foreigners  call  Babylonia  ;  and  it  was 
easy  and  natural  for  Daniel  to  call  it  so.  But  Jiow  or  icJn/  came  a  Pseudo- 
Daniel  to  such  a  use  of  the  word?  Babylon  he  would  naturally,  and 
almost  with  certainty,  call  it. 

"  (o)  Dan.  i.  5  tells  us  that  the  Hebrew  lads  were  to  be  fed  from  the 
king's  table.  Such  a  custom,  even  in  respect  to  royal  prisoners,  Jer. 
lii.  33,  34,  discloses.  Among  the  Persians  this  was  notorious,  and  ex- 
tended to  the  whole  corps  d'elites  of  the  soldiery.  Ctesias  tells  us,  that 
tlie  king  of  Persia  daily  fed  15,000  men.  How  came  the  late  writer  of 
Daniel  to  be  acquainted  with  a  minute  circumstance  of  the  nature  of  that 
before  us  ? 

"  (^)  Daniel  and  his  companions  receive  Chaldee  r  ames,  some  of  which 


I 


INTRODUCTION.  LXITI 

ere  compounded  of  the  names  of  their  false  god?.     In  2  Kings  s.xiy.  17, 

Nebuchadnezzar  is  reported  to  have  changed  the  name  of  king  Mattaniah 
into  Zedekiah.  How  did  the  hite  forger  of  the  book  come  by  the  notion 
of  assigning  to  his  Hebrew  heroes  the  names  of  idol-gods  ?  The  rigoroua 
attachment  to  all  that  was  Jewish,  and  the  hearty  hatred  of  heathenism 
by  all  the  pious  in  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  makes  it  difficult  to  ac- 
count for  his  course. 

"  [q)  In  Dan.  ii.  1,  the  Babj-lonish  mode  of  reckoning  time  is  intro- 
duced, viz.,  the  second  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  Where  else,  unless  in 
Ezck.  i.  1,  is  this  employed  ?  IIow  came  the  late  interpolator  of  the 
sacred  books  to  betake  himself  to  this  mode  of  reckoning ;  and  especially 
since  it  apparently  contradicts  i.  1,  v.  18  ?  See  the  solution  of  the  diffi- 
culty, in  Exc.  I.  p.  19,  scq. 

"  (r)  In  Dan.  ii.  5,  iii.  lid,  one  part  of  the  threatened  punishment  is, 
that  the  houses  of  the  transgressors  should  be  turned  into  a  dung-hill,  or 
rather  a  morass-heap.  Here  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  Baby- 
lonish mode  of  building  is  developed.  The  houses  were  mostly  coi- 
structed  of  sun-baked  bricks,  or  Avith  those  slightly  burned ;  and  when 
once  demolished,  the  rain  and  dew  would  soon  dissolve  the  whole  m>"iss, 
and  make  them  sink  down,  in  that  wet  land  near  the  river,  into  a  miry 
place  of  clay,  whenever  the  weather  was  wet. 

"  (s)  In  Dan.  iii.  1,  the  plain  of  JJin-a  is  mentioned  ;  a  name  found  no- 
where else,  yet  mentioned  here  as  a  place  familiar  to  the  original  roadera 
of  the  book,  inasmuch  as  no  explanation  is  added.  Whence  did  the 
Fseudo-Daniel  derive  this  name  ? 

"  [t)  In  Dan.  ii.  5,  and  iii.  G,  we  find  the  punishment  of  hewing  to 
pieces  and  burning  in  ovens  mentioned.  Testimony  to  such  modes  of 
punishment  may  be  found  in  Ezek.  xvi.  40,  xxiii.  25,  and  Jer.  xxix.  22. 
But  such  a  mode  of  punishment  could  not  exist  among  the  Persians,  who 
wdYQ  Jire-icorshippers  ;  and  accordingly  in  chap.  vi.  we  find  casting  into  a 
den  of  lions  as  substituted  for  it. 

"(»)  In  Dan.  iii.  we  find  not  only  a  huge  idol  (in  keeping  with  the 
Babylonish  taste),  but  also  a  great  variety  of  musical  instruments  era- 
ployed  at  the  dedication  of  it.  Quintus  Curtius  has  told  us,  that  when 
Alexander  the  Great  entered  Babylon,  '  there  were  in  the  procession 
singing  Magi  .  .  .  and  artists  playing  on  stringed  instruments  of  a  pecu- 
liar kind,  accustomed  to  chant  the  praises  of  the  king,'  (v.  3.) 

"  (f)  According  to  Ilerod.  I.  195,  the  Babylonish  costume  consisted  of 
three  parts,  first  the  wide  and  long  pantaloons  for  the  lower  part  of  the 
person;  secondly,  a  woollen  shirt;  and  thirdly,  a  large  mantle  with  a 
girdle  around  it.  On  the  cylinder  rolls  found  at  Babylon,  MUnter  (Relig. 
(1.  Bab.  s.  90)  discovered  the  same  costume.  In  Dan.  iii.  21,  the  same 
three  loading  and  principal  articles  of  dress  are  particularized.  Other 
parts  of  clothing  are  merely  referred  to,  but  not  specificated ;  but  these 
gai-ments  being  large  and  loose,  and  made  of  delicate  material,  are  men- 
tioned in  order  to  show  how  powerless  the  furnace  was,  since  they  were  not 
even  singed.    IIow  did  a  Pseulo-Daniel  obtain  such  particulars  as  these? 

'■  hv)  Dan  vi.  10  shows,  that  the  regal  token  of  honour  bestowed,  was  i 
collet  or  golden  chain  put  around  the  neck.  Brissonius,  in  his  work  on 
the  Persian  dominion,  has  shown  the  same  custom  among  the  Persian 
kings,  who,  not  improbably,  borrowed  it  from  the  Babylonians. 


LXIV  INTRODUCTION. 

"  [x)  In  Dan.  vi.  8,  '  the  laws  of  the  Medes  which  change  n)t'  are  merv«    . 
tioned.     In  Esth.  i.  19,  and  viii.  8,  we  have  repeated  mention  of  this  j 
same   peculiar    custom.      The   reason   of  this   probably  was,  that  the 
kin^  was  regarded  as  the  impersonation  of  Ormusd,  and   therefore  as 
infallible. 

"  (//)  In  Dan.  vii.  9,  Ave  have  a  description  of  the  divine  throne  as 
placed  upon  moveahJe  xclicds.  The  same  we  find  in  Ezekiel  i.  and  s, ; 
which  renders  it  quite  probable,  that  the  Babylonian  throne  was  con- 
structed in  this  way,  so  that  the  monarch  might  move  in  procesEiiins, 
with  all  the  insignia  of  royalty  about  him. 

"  {z)  It  deserves  special  remark,  that  Daniel  has  given  individual  clas- 
sifications of  priests  and  civilians,  such  as  are  nowhere  else  given  in 
Scripture,  and  the  knowledge  of  which  must  have  been  acquired  from  ' 
intimate  acquaintance  with  the  state  of  things  in  Babylon.  In  Dan.  ii. 
2,  10,  27,  the  various  classes  of  diviners  and  literati  are  named.  In  Dan. 
iii.  2,  .3,  the  different  classes  of  magistrates,  civilians,  and  rulers,  are 
specifically  named.  On  this  whole  subject,  I  must  refer  the  reader  to 
E.XC.  III.  on  the  Chaldees,  p.  34,  seq.  above.  Whence  a  Maccabaeaii  writer 
could  have  derived  such  knowledge,  it  would  be  difficult  to  say.  It  is  one 
of  those  circumstances  which  could  not  Avell  be  feigned.  Several  of  the 
names  occur  nowhere  else  in  the  Ileb.  Bible,  and  some  of  them  are  evi- 
dently derivates  of  the  Parsi  or  Median  language ;  e.  g.  pj-iD  in  vi.  3,  a 
name  unknown  in  the  Semitic.  On  the  other  hand,  several  of  them  ai'e 
exclusively  Ciialdean  ;  c.  g.  Dan.  iii.  3,  Nn;j^iN,  N'risn,  of  which  no  pro- 
fane wi-iter  has  given  the  least  hint.  How  came  the  Pseudo-Daniel  to  a 
knowledge  of  such  officers?" 

The  evidence  that  the  book  is  a  genuine  production  of  the  Daniel  of  the 
captivity,  may  l)e  summed  up  now  in  few  wonls.  There  is  (1),  on  the 
face  of  the  book,  the  testimony  of  the  writer  himself  to  his  own  author- 
ship— good  evidence  in  itself,  unless  there  is  some  reason  for  calling  it 
in  question  or  setting  it  aside.  There  is  (2)  the  fact  that  it  was  early 
received  into  ttie  canon  as  a  part  of  the  inspii-ed  Scriptures,  and  that  it 
has  always  been,  both  by  Jews  and  Christians,  regarded  as  entitled  to  a 
place  there.  Tliere  is  (3)  the  express  testimony  of  the  Saviour  that  Daniel 
was  a  prophet,  and  a  clear  reference  to  a  part  of  the  prophecy  by  him,  aa 
we  have  it  now  in  the  Book  of  Daniel.  There  is  (4)  express  testimony  that 
the  book  was  in  existence  before  the  time  of  tlie  Maccabees,  and  was  then 
regarded  as  a  genuine  production  of  Daniel;  particularly  [a]  tlie  testimony 
of  Josephus;  [b)  of  tlie  author  of  the  Book  of  Maccabees,  and  (c)  of  the 
authors  of  the  Septuagint  translation.  There  is  (5)  the  fact  that 
the  book  was  so  written  in  two  different  languages  that  we  cannot 
well  attribute  it  to  a  writer  of  the  Maccabean  period.  And  there  is 
(6)  "  the  accurate  knowledge  which  the  writer  of  the  Book  of  Daniel 
displays  of  ancient  history,  manners,  and  customs,  and  Oriental-Baby- 
lonish peculiarities,  which  shows  that  he  must  have  lived  at  or  near  the 
time  and  place  when  and  where  the  book  leads  us  to  suppose  that  he 
lived."  For  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  what  other  book  can 
more  clear  and  decisive  testimony  be  brought?  These  considerations 
Beem  to  make  it  clear  that  the  book  could  not  have  been  a  forgery  of  thg 
time  of  the  Maccabees,  and  that  every  circumstance  combinea  to  confirm 


INTRODUCTION.  LX"V 

the  commou  belief  that  it  was  written  in  the  time  of  the  exile,  and  by  the 
author  whoso  name  it  bears.  But  if  this  is  so,  then  its  canonical  autho- 
rity is  established  :  for  we  have  all  that  can  be  urged  in  favor  of  the 
canonical  authority  of  any  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  Its  place 
in  the  canon  from  the  earliest  period  ;  the  testimony  of  Christ ;  the  testi- 
mony of  Josephus  and  the  Jews  in  all  ages  to  its  canonical  authority  ;  the 
testimony  of  the  early  Christian  fathers  ;  its  prophetic  character  ;  and  the 
strong  internal  probabilities  that  it  was  written  at  the  time  and  in  the 
manner  in  which  it  professes  to  have  been,  all  go  to  confirm  the  opinion 
that  it  is  a  genuine  production  of  the  Daniel  of  the  capjtivity,  and  worthy 
to  be  received  and  accredited  as  a  part  of  the  inspired  oracles  of  truth. 
On  one  of  these  points,  which  has  not  been  insisted  on  in  this  Introduc- 
tion— its  projjheUc  character — the  evidence  can  be  appreciated  only  by  an 
examination  of  the  particular  prophecies  ;  and  that  will  be  seen  as  the 
i-esult  of  the  exposition  of  those  parts  of  the  I  took  which  refer  to  future 
events.  It  may  be  said,  in  general,  however,  that  if  it  is  proved  to  have 
been  written  in  the  time  of  the  captivity,  there  will  be  no  hesitation  in 
admitting  its  inspiration.  Porphyry  maintained,  as  we  have  seen,  that 
the  pretended  prophecies  were  so  clear  that  they  mvsi  have  been  written 
after  the  events  ;  and  this,  as  we  have  seen  also,  is  one  of  the  leading  ob- 
jections urged  against  the  book  in  more  modern  times.  If  this  is  so,  then, 
apart  from  all  the  evidence  which  will  bo  furnished  of  the  fulfillment  of 
the  prophecies  of  Daniel  in  the  course  of  the  exposition,  it  may  be  pro- 
perly inferred,  that  if  the  book  was  written  in  the  time  in  Avhich  it  pro- 
fesses to  have  been,  it  furnishes  the  highest  evidence  of  inspiration,  for 
no  one  can  pretend  that  the  predictions  occurring  in  it,  pertaining  to 
future  events,  are  the  results  of  any  mere  natural  sagacity. 


g  4    NATURE,  DESIGN,  AND  GENERAL  CHARACTER  OF  THE 
BOOK  OF  DANIEL. 

The  Book  of  Daniel  is  not  properl}-  a  liistory  either  of  the  Jews  or 
Babylonians,  nor  is  it  a  biography  of  the  writer  himself.  It  is  not  con- 
tinuous in  its  structure,  nor  does  it  appear  to  have  been  written  at  one 
time.  Though  the  work,  as  we  have  seen,  of  one  author,  it  is  made  up 
of  portions,  written  evidently  on  different  occasions,  in  two  different  lan- 
guages, and  having,  to  a  considerable  extent,  different  objects  in  view. 
Though  the  author  was  a  Jewish  exile,  and  surrounded  liy  his  own  country- 
men as  exiles,  yet  there  is  almost  no  reference  to  the  past  history  of  these 
people,  or  to  the  causes  of  their  having  been  carried  into  captivity,  and  no 
description  of  their  condition,  struggles,  and  sufferings  in  their  exile  ;  and 
though  written  by  one  who  resided  through  the  greatest  part  of  a  very 
long  life  in  a  land  of  strangers,  and  having  every  opportunity  of  obtain- 
ing information,  there  is  no  distinct  reference  to  their  history,  and  no 
description  of  their  manners  and  customs.  And  although  his  own  career 
while  there  was  eventful,  yet  the  allusions  to  himself  arc  very  few;  and 
of  the  largest  portion  of  that  long  life  in  Babylon — probably  embracing 
more  than  seventy  years — we  have  no  information  whatever.  In  the 
book  there  are  few  or  no  allusions  to  the  condition  of  the  exiles  there ; 
but  two  of  the  native  kings  that  reigned  there  during  that  long  period  are 
6* 


LXVI  INTRODUCTION. 

even  mentioned;  one  of  those  —  Nebuchadnezzar  —  only  Trh en  Daniel 
interpreted  two  of  his  dreams,  and  when  the  colossal  idol  was  set  up  on 
the  plain  of  Dura  ;  and  the  othei- — Belshazzar — only  on  the  last  day  of  his 
life.  The  Look  is  not  regular  in  its  structure,  but  consists  of  an  inter- 
mixture of  history  and  prophecy,  apparently  composed  as  occasion 
demanded,  and  then  unit'^d  in  a  single  volume.  Yet  it  has  a  unity  of 
authorship  and  design,  as  we  have  seen,  and  is  evidently  the  production 
of  a  single  individual. 

In  considering  the  nature,  design,  and  general  character  of  the  book, 
the  attention  may  be  properly  directed  to  the  following  points  :— 

I.  The  portions  containing  incidents  in  the  life  of  the  author,  and  of 

his  companions  in  Babylon,  of  permanent  value. 

II.  The  prophetic  portions. 

III.  The  language  and  style  of  the  book. 

I.  The  portions  containing  incidents  in  the  life  of  the  author,  and  of 
his  companions  in  Babylon,  of  permanent  value. 

As  already  remarked,  the  allusions  to  his  own  life,  and  to  the  circum- 
stances of  his  companions  in  exile,  are  few  in  number ;  and  it  may  be 
added,  that  where  there  are  such  allusions  they  are  made  apparently 
rather  to  illustrate  their  principles,  and  the  nature  of  their  religion,  than 
to  create  an  interest  in  them  personally.  We  could  make  out  but  little 
respecting  their  biography  from  this  volume,  though  that  little  is  suffi- 
cient to  give  us  decided  views  of  their  character,  and  of  the  value  and 
power  of  the  religion  which  they  professed. 

The  few  personal  incidents  which  w^e  have,  relate  to  such  points  as  the 
following: — The  selection  of  Daniel,  and  three  other  captives,  when  young, 
with  a  view  to  their  being  trained  in  the  language  and  science  of  the 
Chaldeans,  that  they  might  be  employed  in  the  service  of  the  govern- 
ment, ch.  i.  ;  the  fact  that  Daniel  was  called,  when  all  the  skill  of  the 
Chaldeans  failed,  to  interpret  a  dream  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  that  he 
was  enabled  to  give  an  explanation  that  was  so  satisfactory  that  the  king 
promoted  him  to  exalted  honor,  ch.  ii. ;  the  narrative  respecting  the  three 
friends  of  Daniel — Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abednego, — who  refused  to 
fall  down  and  adore  the  golden  image  that  Nebuchadnezzar  erected  in  the 
plain  of  Dura,  and  who  for  their  disobedience  were  cast  into  the  fiery 
furnace,  ch.  iii. ;  Daniel's  interpretation  of  a  second  dream  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, and  the  fulfillment  of  the  interpretation  of  that  dream  on  the 
monarch,  ch.  iv. ;  his  interpretation  of  the  hand-writing  on  the  wall  at 
the  feast  of  Belshazzar,  ch.  v. ;  and  the  attempt  of  the  enemies  of  Daniel 
to  destroy  his  influence  and  his  life  by  taking  advantage  of  his  known 
pietj',  aud  the  firmness  of  his  attachment  to  God,  ch.  vi. 

Tliese  must  have  been  but  a  ^nw  of  the  incidents  that  occurred  to 
Daniel  in  the  course  of  a  long  life  spent  in  Babylon,  and  they  were  pro- 
bably selected  as  furnishing  valuable  illustrations  of  character;  as 
evincing  the  nature  of  true  piety  ;  as  proofs  of  divine  inspiration  ;  and  as 
showing  that  God  has  control  over  kings  and  nations.  All  that  is  hero 
Slated  occurred  at  distant  intervals  in  a  long  life,  and  this  fact  should  be 
remembered  in  reading  the  book.  For  the  practical  lessons  taught  by 
these  portions  of  the  book,  I  may  be  permitted  to  refer  to  the  remaTrks  at 
the  close  of  chs.  i.  ii.  iii.  vi. 


INTKODUCTION.  LXVII 

II.  The  prophetic  portions  of  the  book. 

The  prophecies  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  may  be  .arranged  under 
tTTO  great  classes : — those  relating  to  the  Babylonian  monarchy  ;  and 
those  of  more  general  interest  pertaining  to  the  future  history  of  the 
world. 

(1.)  The  former  arc  confined  to  the  calamities  that  would  come  upon 
the  two  monarchs  who  are  mentioned  in  the  book — Nebuchadnezzar  and 
Belshazzar.  Of  the  former  of  these  kings,  Nebuchadnezzar,  his  derange- 
ment as  a  judgment  of  heaven,  on  account  of  his  pride,  is  predicted, 
ch.  iv. ;  and  of  the  latter,  Belshazzar,  the  termination  of  his  reign,  and 
the  taking  of  his  kingdom,  are  predicted  on  account  of  his  impiety,  ch.  v. 
The  object  did  not  seem  to  bo  to  state  what  fixrther  would  occur  to  the 
kingdom  of  the  Chaldeans,  except  as  it  should  be  lost  in  the  great  king- 
dom of  the  Medes  and  Persians,  in  which  it  would  be  absorbed. 

(2.)  Those  of  general  interest  pertaining  to  future  times.  Of  these 
there  are  several  classes : — 

(a.)  The  prospective  history  of  the  revolutions  in  the  great  kingdoms 
of  the  world ;  or  a  general  glance  at  what  would  happen  in  relation  t( 
the  empires  that  were  then  playing  their  part  in  human  affairs,  and 
of  those  which  would  grow  out  of  the  kingdoms  existing  in  the  time  of 
Daniel. 

These  may  be  arranged  under  the  following  general  heads : — 

(1.)  A  description  of  the  great  kingdoms  or  empires  that  would  pro- 
perly grow  out  of  the  Babylonian  or  Chaldean  monarchy,  ch.  ii.  That 
kingdom  was,  in  the  time  of  Daniel,  the  great,  and  almost  the  single, 
sovereignty  of  the  earth  ;  for,  in  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  this  had 
absorbed  all  others.  From  this,  however,  were  to  spring  other  great 
dynasties  that  were  to  rule  over  the  world,  and  that  might  properly,  in 
some  sense,  be  represented  as  the  successors  of  this.  These  great  revo- 
lutions are  represented  in  the  dream  of  Nebuchadnezzar  respecting  the 
golden  image,  ch.  ii.,  and  they  are  described  by  Daniel  as  (a)  the  great 
monarchy  of  which  Nebuchadnezzar  was  the  head — Babylon — represented 
in  the  image  by  the  head  of  gold,  ch.  ii.  38 ;  {h)  as  another  kingdom 
inferior  to  this,  represented  in  the  image  by  the  breast  and  arms  of 
silver  (ch.  ii.  32,  39) — the  Medo-Persian  empire,  that  would  succeed  that 
of  Babylon ;  (c)  as  a  third  kingdom  that  Avould  succeed  this,  represented 
in  the  image  by  the  belly  and  the  thighs  of  brass,  ch.  ii.  32,  39  ;  [d)  as  a 
fourth  kingdom  more  mighty  than  either,  subduing  all  nations  under  it, 
and  crushing  the  powers  of  the  earth,  yet  made  of  discordant  materials, 
so  as  never  firmly  to  adhere  as  one — represented  by  the  legs  of  iron,  and 
the  feet  and  toes  partly  of  iron  and  partly  of  clay  in  the  image  (ch.  ii.  32, 
41-43),  denoting  the  mighty  Roman  power  ;  and  (e)  as  another  kingdom 
that  would  spring  up  under  this  fourth  kingdom,  and  that  would  ulti- 
mately supplant  it,  and*  become  the  permanent  kingdom  on  the  earth 
(ch.  ii.  44,  45). 

Substantially  the  same  representation  occurs  again  in  ch.  vii.,  under 
the  image  of  a  succession  of  formidable  beasts  that  were  seen  by  Daniel 
in  a  dream.  These  four  great  kingdoms,  represented  successively  by  a 
lion,  by  a  bear,  by  a  leopard,  and  by  a  non-descript  monster,  were  also 
succeeded  by  a  great  and  permanent  kingdom  on  the  earth — the  reign  of 
Qod.     In  this  representation,  Daniel  goes  more  into  detail  in  respect 


iL,XVm  INTRODUCTION. 

to  the  last  great  empire  tlian  he  does  in  interpreting  the  dream  of  Nehn- 
chadnezzai-.  Indeed,  the  design  of  this  Intter  representation  seems  to  lie, 
to  give  a  more  full  account  of  the  chanpi;es  Avbich  Avould  occur  in  this  last 
great  kingdom  on  the  earth — the  kingdom  of  the  saints — that  had  been 
before  given. 

(2.)  A  particular  prophecy  of  the  conquests  of  the  king  of  Greciae — 
Alexander  the  Great  —  extending  down  to  the  time  of  Antioehus  !* 
Epiphanes,  and  to  the  calamities  and  desolations  which  he  -wonld  bring 
upon  the  holy  land,  ch.  viii.  This  occurs  in  a  vision  which  Daniel  had  at 
Shushan,  in  the  province  of  Elam,  and  consisted  of  a  representation  of  a 
ram  with  two  liorns,  "  pushing"  in  every  direction,  as  if  to  extend  its 
conquests  everywhere.  From  the  Avest,  however,  there  came  a  goat,  with 
a  single  horn  between  its  eyes,,  that  attacked  and  overcame  the  ram. 
This  single  horn  on  the  head  of  the  goat  is  subsequently  represented  as 
broken,  and  in  its  place  there  came  up  four  other  horns,  and  out  of  one 
of  them  a  little  horn  that  became  great,  and  that  magnified  itself  pnr- 
ticularly  against  "  the  prince  of  the  host,"  and  that  took  away  the  daily 
sacrifice,  or  that  closed  the  sacred  services  of  religion  in  the  temple. 

A  part  of  this  is  explained  by  Gabriel,  as  referring  to  the  king  of 
Grecian;  and  there  can  be  no  dlfiiculty  in  understanding  that  Alexander 
the  Great  is  referred  to,  and  that  bj'  the  four  horns  that  sprang  up  out 
of  the  one  that  was  broken,  the  four  kingdoms  into  which  that  of  Alex- 
ander was  divided  at  his  death  are  meant,  and  that  by  the  little  horn  that 
sprang  up  Antioehus  Epiphanes  is  designated. 

(3.)  A  particular  and  minute  prophecy  respecting  the  wars  between 
two  (;f  the  kingdoms  that  sprang  out  of  the  empire  of  Alexander — Syria 
and  Egypt  —  so  far  especially  as  they  afi"ectcd  the  holy  land,  and  the 
services  in  the  sanctuary  of  God,  chs.  x.  xi.  This  vision  occurred  in  the 
third  year  of  the  reign  of  C3-rus,  and  on  an  occasion  when  Daniel  had 
been  fasting  three  full  weeks.  The  prediction  was  imparted  to  him  by 
an  angel  that  appeared  to  him  by  the  river  Iliddekel,  or  Tigris,  and  con- 
tains a  detailed  account  of  what  would  occur  for  a  long  period  in  the 
conflicts  which  would  exist  between  the  sovereigns  of  S^-ria  and  Egypt. 
In  these  wars  the  Hebrew  people  were  to  be  deeply  interested,  for  their 
country  lay  between  the  two  contending  kingdoms ;  their  land  would  be 
taken  and  re-taken  in  those  conflicts  ;  not  a  few  of  the  great  battles  that 
would  be  fought  in  these  conflicts  would  be  fought  on  their  territory  ;  and 
deep  and  permanent  disasters  would  occur  to  them  in  consequence  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  Hebrew  people  would  regard  and  treat  one  or  both 
of  the  contending  parties.  This  prophetic  history  is  conducted  onward, 
Avith  great  particularity,  to  the  death  of  Antioehus  Epiphanes — the  most 
formidable  enemy  that  the  Hebrew  people  would  have  to  encounter  in  the 
future,  and  then  (ch.  xii.),  the  vision  terminates  Avith  a  few  uncon- 
nected li.iids  of  Avhat  would  occur  in  future  periods,  to  the  end  of  the 
world. 

It  was  from  this  portion  of  the  book  particularly  that  Porphyry 
argued  that  the  whole  Avork  must  have  been  Avritten  after  the  events  had 
•.''jcurred,  and  that,  therefore,  it  must  be  a  forgery  of  a  later  age  than  the 
time  of  the  exile  in  Babylon. 

(4.)  A  particular  and  minute  prophecy  respecting  the  time  when  the 
Messiah  would  appear,  ch.  ix.     This  was  imparted  to   Daniel  when, 


INTRODUCTION.  LXIX 

anxious  nbout  the  close  of  the  long  captivity  of  his  countrymen,  and  sup- 
posing; that  the  prodictod  time  of  the  return  to  the  hxnd  of  their  fathers 
drew  on,  he  gave  himself  to  an  earnest  and  careful  study  of  the  lujoks 
of  Jeremiah.  At  the  close  of  the  solemn  prayer  which  he  offered  on  that 
oc.asion  (ch.  ix.  4—19),  the  angel  Gabri.l  appeared  to  him  (ch.  ix.  £0,  21), 
to  assure  him  that  his  prayer  was  heard,  and  to  make  an  important  com- 
munication to  him  respecting  future  times,  ch.  ix.  22,  23.  lie  then  pro- 
ceeded to  inform  him  how  long  a  period  was  determined  in  respect  to 
the  holy  city,  before  the  great  work  should  be  accomplished  of  making  ar 
end  of  sin,  and  of  making  reconciliation  for  iniquity,  and  of  bringing  ii^ 
everlasting  righteousness ;  when,  that  great  work  having  been  accom- 
plished, the  oblations  at  the  temple  Avould  cease,  and  the  overspreading 
of  abomination  would  occur,  and  desolation  would  come  upon  the  temple 
and  city,  ch.  ix.  24-27.  This  celebrated  prophecy  of  the  "  seventy  weeks" 
is  among  the  most  important,  and,  in  some  respects,  among  the  most 
difficult  parts  of  the  sacred  volume.  If  the  common  interpretation — and 
the  one  that  is  adopted  in  these  Notes — Is  correct,  it  is  the  m.'>st  definite 
prediction  of  the  time  when  the  Messiah  would  appear,  to  be  found  in 
the  Old  Testament. 

(5.)  Particular  prophecies  respecting  events  that  would  occur  after 
the  coming  of  the  Messiah.     These  relate  to  two  points  '• — 

A.  Prophecies  relating  to  the  church,  ch.  vii.  7-27. 

(a.)  The  rise  of  ten  kingdoms  out  of  the  great  fourth  monarchy 
which  would  succeed  the  Babylonian,  the  Medo-Persian,  and 
the  Macedonian — to  wit,  the  Roman  power,  ch.  vii.  24. 

(6.)  The  rise  of  another  poAver  after  them,  springing  out  of  them, 
and  subduing  three  of  those  powers — to  wit,  the  Fapal  power, 
ch.  vii.  24. 

(c.)  The  characteristics  of  that  new  power — as  arrogant,  and  per- 
secuting, and  claiming  supreme  legislation  over  the  world, 
ch.  vii.  25. 

(fZ.)  The  duration  of  this  power,  ch.  vii.  25. 

(e.)    The  manner  in  which  It  would  be  terminated,  ch.  vii.  26. 

[f.)  The  permanent  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  the  saints 
on  the  earth,  ch.  vii.  27. 

B.  Prophecies  relating  to  the  final  judgment,  and  the  end  of  ali 
things,  ch.  xii. 

This  portion  (ch.  xii.)  is  made  up  of  Jiiitfs  and  fragments  —  broken 
thoughts  and  suggestions — which  there  was  no  occasion  to  fill  up.  What 
is  said  Is  not  communicated  in  a  direct  form  as  a  revelation  of  new  truths, 
but  is  rather  based  on  certain  truths  as  already  known,  and  employed  here 
for  the  Illustration  of  others.  It  is  «5.s!/?He(Z  that  there  will  be  a  resurrection 
of  the  dead  and  a  judgment,  and  the  writer  employs  the  language  based  on 
this  assumption  to  illustrate  the  point  Immediately  before  him,  ch.  xii.  2, 
3,  4,  9,  13.  There  Is  also  a  ver}-  obscure  reference  to  the  times  when 
certain  great  events  were  to  occur  in  the  future  (ch.  xii.  11,  12)  ;  but 
there  Is  nothing,  in  this  respect,  that  can  enable  us  certainly  to  determine 
when  these  events  will  take  place. 

In  reference  to  these  prophetic  portions  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  a  few 
illustrative  remarks  may  now  be  made : — 

(1.)  They  relate  to  most  momentous  events  in  the  history  of  the  worl4 


LXX  INTRODUCTION. 

If  the  views  taken  of  these  portions  of  the  book  are  correct,  then  the  ey« 
of  the  prophet  rested  on  those  events  in  the  future  Avhich  ■would  enter 
most  deeply  into  the  character  of  comins;  asies,  and  which  would  do  more 
than  any  other  to  determine  the  final  condition  of  the  world. 

(2.)  The  prophecies  in  Daniel  are  more  viinntc  than  any  others  in  the 
Bible.  This  is  particularly  the  case  in  respect  to  the  four  great  king- 
doms which  would  arise  ;  to  the  conquests  of  Alexander  the  Great ;  to  the 
kingdoms  which  would  spring  out  of  the  one  great  empire  that  would  bo 
founded  by  him  ;  to  the  wars  that  would  exist  between  two  of  thos2 
sovereignties  ;  to  the  time  when  the  iMessiah  would  appear ;  to  the  man- 
ner in  which  he  would  be  cut  off;  to  the  final  destruction  of  the  holy  city; 
and  to  the  rise,  character,  and  destiny  of  the  Prvpac3^  Of  these  great 
events  there  are  no  other  so  minute  connected  descriptions  anywhere 
else  in  the  Old  Testament;  and  even,  on  many  of  these  points,  the  more 
full  disclosures  of  the  Xew  Testament  receive  important  light  from  the 
prophecies  of  Daniel. 

(3.)  There  is  a  remarkable  resemblance  between  many  of  the  predic- 
tions in  Daniel  and  in  the  Book  of  Revelation.  No  one  can  peruse  the 
two  books  without  being  satisfied  that,  in  many  respects,  they  were 
designed  to  refer  to  the  same  periods  in  the  history  of  the  world,  and  to 
the  same  events,  and  especially  where  time  is  mentioned.  There  is, 
indeed,  as  is  remarked  in  the  Preface  to  these  Notes,  no  express  allusion 
in  the  Apocalypse  to  Daniel.  There  is  no  direct  quotation  from  the 
book.  There  is  no  certain  evidence  that  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse  ever 
Baw  the  Book  of  Daniel,  though  no  one  can  doubt  that  he  had.  There  is 
nothing  in  the  Apocalypse  which  might  not  have  been  written  if  the  Book 
of  Daniel  had  not  been  written,  or  if  it  had  been  entirely  unknown  to 
John.  Perhaps  it  may  be  added,  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  Book  of 
Revelation  which  might  not  have  been  as  easily  explained  if  the  Book  of 
Daniel  had  not  been  written.  And  yet,  it  is  manifest,  that  in  most  im- 
portant respects  the  authors  of  the  two  books  refer  to  the  same  great 
events  in  history ;  describe  the  same  important  changes  in  human 
afi"airs  ;  refer  to  the  same  periods  of  duration  ;  and  have  in  their  eye  the 
same  termination  of  things  on  the  earth.  No  other  two  books  in  the 
Bilde  have  the  same  relation  to  each  other ;  nor  are  there  any  other  two 
in  which  a  commentary  on  the  one  will  introduce  so  many  topics  which 
must  be  considered  in  the  other,  or  where  the  explanations  in  the  one  will 
throw  so  much  light  on  the  other. 

III.  The  language  and  style  of  the  book. 

(1.)  The  language  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  nearly  half  Chaldee  and 
half  Ilebrew.  In  ch.  i.  ii.  1 — 3,  it  is  Hebrew ;  from  ch.  ii.  4,  to  the  end 
of  ch.  vii.  it  is  Chaldee,  and  the  remainder  of  the  book  is  Ilebrew. 
The  Book  of  Ezra  also  contains  several  chapters  of  Chaldee,  exhibiting 
the  same  characteristics  as  the  part  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  written  in  that 
language. 

As  Daniel  was  early  trained  in  his  own  country  in  the  knowledge  of 
the  Hebrew,  and  as  he  was  carefully  instructed,  after  being  carried  to 
Baliylon,  in  the  language  and  literature  of  the  Chaldees  (see  ^  1),  it  ia 
certain  that  he  wa^  capable  of  writing  in  either  language  ;  and  it  is  pro- 
bable that  he  would  use  either,  as  there  might  be  occasion,  in  his  inter- 
coiu-so  with  his  own  countrymen,  or  ■with  the  Chaldeans.     There  is  ths 


INTRODUCTION.  LXXI 

highest  probability  that  the  captive  Hebrews  -would  retain  the  kncwledge 
of  their  own  language  in  a  great  degree  of  purity,  during  their  long 
captivity  in  Babylon,  and  that  this  would  be  the  language  which  Daniel 
would  employ  in  iiis  intercourse  with  his  own  countrymen,  while  from  his 
own  situation  at  court,  and  the  necessity  of  his  intercourse  with  the  Chal- 
deans, it  may  be  presumed  that  the  language  which  he  would  perhaps 
most  frequently  employ  would  be  the  Chaldean. 

That  tliei-e  were  reasons  why  one  portion  of  this  book  was  written 
in  Chaldee,  and  another  in  Hebrew,  there  can  be  no  doubt,  but  it  is 
now  utterly  impossible  to  ascertain  what  those  reasons  were.  The  use  of 
one  language  or  the  other  seems  to  be  perfectly  arbitrary.  The  portions 
written  in  Hebrew  have  no  more  relation  to  the  Jews,  and  would  have 
no  more  interest  to  them,  than  those  written  in  Chaldee  ;  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  portions  written  in  Chaldee  have  no  special  relation  to 
the  Chaldeans.  But  while  the  reasons  for  this  change  must  for  ever 
remain  a  secret,  there  are  two  obvious  suggestions  which  have  often  been 
made  in  regard  to  it,  and  which  have  already  been  incidentally  adverted 
to,  as  bearing  on  the  question  of  the  authorship  of  the  book.  (1)  The 
first  is,  that  this  fact  accords  with  the  account  which  we  have  of  the 
education  of  the  author,  as  being  instructed  in  both  these  languages — 
furnishing  thus  an  undesigned  proof  of  the  authenticity  of  the  book ; 
and  (2)  the  other  is,  that  tins  Avould  not  have  occurred  if  the  work  was 
a  forgery  of  a  later  age;  for  [a]  it  is  doubtful  whether,  in  the  age  of 
the  Maccabees,  there  were  any  who  could  write  with  equal  ease  in  both 
languages,  or  could  write  both  languages  with  purity ;  (5)  if  it  could 
be  done,  the  device  would  not  be  one  that  would  be  likely  to  occur  to  the 
author,  and  he  would  have  been  likely  to  betray  the  design  if  it  had 
existed;  and  (c)  as  the  apocryphal  additions  to  Daniel  (see  ^5)  were 
written  in  Greek,  the  presumption  is  that  if  the  book  had  been  forged  in 
that  age  it  would  have  been  wholly  written  in  that  language.  At  all 
events,  the  Jacis  in  the  case,  in  regard  to  the  languages  in  which  the  book 
was  written,  accord  with  all  that  we  know  of  Daniel. 

(2.)  The  book  abounds  with  symbols  and  visions.  In  this  respect  it 
resembles  very  closely  the  writings  of  Ezekiel  and  Zechariah.  One  of 
these  was  his  cotempoi'arj^  and  the  other  lived  but  little  after  him,  and 
it  may  bo  presumed  that  this  style  -of  writing  prevailed  much  in  that 
age.  All  these  writers,  not  improbably,  "formed  thefr  style,  and  their 
manner  of  thinking  and  expression,  in  a  foi-eign  land,  where  symbol,  and 
imagery,  and  vision,  and  dreams,  were  greatly  relished  and  admired. 
The  ruins  of  the  Oriental  cities  recently  brought  to  the  light  of  day,  as 
well  as  those  which  have  ever  remained  exposed  to  view,  are  replete  with 
symbolic  forms  and  images,  which  once  gave  a  play  and  a  delight  to  the 
fancy."  Prof.  Stuart  on  Daniel,  p.  oUo.  Perhaps  none  of  the  other 
I  sacred  Avriters  abound  so  much  in  symbols  and  visions  as  Daniel,  except 
John,  in  the  Book  of  Pvcvelation ;  and  in  these  two,  as  before  suggested, 
the  resemblance  is  remarkable.  The  interpretation  of  either  of  these 
jbooks  involves  the  necessity  of  studying  the  nature  of  symbolic  language  ; 
|aad  on  the  views  takon  of  that  language,  must  depend,  in  a  great  degree, 
the  views  of  the  truths  disclosed  in  these  books. 

I  (3.)  The  Book  of  Daniel,  though  not  written  in  the  style  of  poetry,  yet 
abounds  much  with  the  spii-it  of  poetry — as  the  Book  of  Revelation  does. 


LXXII  INTRODUCTION. 

Indeed  the  Apocalypse  maybe  regarded  as,  on  the  •whole,  the  most  poeiio 
book  in  tiie  Bible.  AV'^e  miss,  indeed,  in  both  these  books,  the  usual 
forms  of  Hebrew  poetry ;  we  miss  the  jjarallelism  (comp.  Intro,  to  Job, 
I  5) ;  but  the  i^pirit  of  poetry  pervades  both  the  Book  of  Daniel  and  the 
Book  of  Revehition,  and  the  latter,  especially  if  it  were  a  mere  human 
production,  would  be  ranked  among  the  highest  creations  of  genius. 
Much  of  Daniel,  indeed,  is  simple  prose — alike  in  structure  and  in  form  ; 
but  much  .also  in  his  visions  deserves  to  be  classed  among  the  works  of 
imagination.  Throughout  the  book  there  are  frequent  bursts  of  feel- 
ing of  a  high  order  (comp.  ch.  ii.  19-23) ;  there  are  many  passages  that 
are  sublime  (comp.  chs.  ii.  27-45,  iv.  19-27,  v.  17-28)  ;  there  is  a  spirit  of 
unshaken  fidelity  and  boldness — as  in  the  passages  just  referred  to  ;  there 
is  true  grandeur  in  the  prophetic  portions  (comp.  chs.  vii.  9-14,  x.  5-9, 
xi.  41-45,  xii.  1-3,  5-8)  ;  anVl  there  is,  throughout  the  book,  a  spirit  of 
humble,  sincere,  firm,  and  devoted  piety,  characterising  the  author  as  a 
man  eminently  prudent  and  wise,  respectful  in  his  intercourse  with 
others,  faithful  in  every  trust,  unceasing  in  the  discharge  of  his  duties  to 
God;  —  a  man  Avho  preferred  to  lose  the  highest  offices  which  kings 
could  confer,  and  to  subject  himself  to  shame,  and  to  death,  rather  than 
shrink,  in  the  slightest  degree,  from  the  discharge  of  the  proper  duties  of 
religion. 


g  5,    TIIE  APOCRYPHAL  ADDITIONS  TO  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL. 

These  additions  are  three  in  number: — 

(1.)  "The  Song  of  the  Three  Holy  Children;"  that  is,  the  song  of 
Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abednego,  who  were  cast  into  the  burning  fur- 
nace by  Nebuchadnezzar,  ch.  iii.  This  "  Song,"  as  it  is  called,  is  inserted, 
in  the  Greek  copies,  in  ch.  iii.,  between  the  twenty-third  and  twenty- 
fourth  verses,  and  contains  sixty-eight  verses,  making  the  whole  chapter, 
in  the  Greek,  to  contain  an  hundred  verses.  The  "  Song"  consists  pro- 
perly of  three  parts  :  I.  A  hymn  of  "  Azariah,"  or  of  "  Ananiah,  Azariah, 
and  Misael" — Xvaviai  naX  Aiapia;  Kai  Mi(ra)')X — of  whom  Azariah  is  the  speaker, 
in  which  praise  is  given  to  God,  and  a  prayer  is  offered  that  they  may 
be  accepted,  preserved,  and  delivered,  vs.  1-22.  These  are  the  Hebrew 
names  of  the  three  persons  that  were  cast  into  the  fiery  furnace  (Dan.  i. 
6,  7),  but  why  tiiese  names  are  inserted  hero  rather  than  the  names  given 
them  in  Babylon  by  the  "  prince  of  the  eunuchs"  (ch.  i.  7),  and  which 
are  used  in  the  Chaldee  in  this  chapter,  is  not  known  ;  and  the  circum- 
stance that  they  are  so  used  furnishes  a  strong  presumption  that  this 
addition  in  Greek  is  spurious,  since,  in  the  other  portions  of  the  chapter 
(vs.  12,  13,  14,  IG,  19,  marked  in  Codex  Chisian.  in  brackets),  the  same 
names  occur  which  are  found  in  the  original  Chaldee.  II.  A  statement, 
that  the  king's  servants  added  fuel  to  the  flame,  or  kept  up  the  intensity 
of  the  heat  by  putting  in  rosin,  pitch,  tow,  and  small  wood,  making  the 
furnace  so  hot  that  tlie  flame  rose  above  it  to  the  height  of  forty-nine 
cubits,  and  so  hot  as  to  consume  the  Chaldeans  that  stood  around  it,  but 
that  the  angel  of  the  Lord  came  down,  and  smote  the  flame  of  fire  out 
of  the  oven,  and  made  the  midst  of  the  furnace  like  a  moist,  whistling 
wind,  so  that  the  three  "  children"  were  safe,  vs.  23-27.     HI.  A  hymn 


INTRODUCTION.  LXXIII 

of  praise,  calling  on  all  things  to  praise  God,  uttered  by  "  the  three,  as  out 
of  one  mouth,"  vs.  28-08.  The  narrative  then  proceeds,  in  the  Greek 
translation,  as  it  is  in  the  Chaldee,  and  as  it  now  stands  in  our  common 
translation  of  the  Book  of  Daniel. 

(2.)  The  second  addition  is  vrhat  is  called  "  The  History  of  Susanna.* 
This  is  a  story  the  design  of  which  is  to  honour  Daniel.  A  man  in  Baby- 
lon of  great  wealth,  by  the  name  of  Joacim,  marries  Susanna,  a  Jewess, 
who  had  been  brought  up  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord.  The  house  of 
Joacim  was  a  place  of  much  resort,  and  particularly  by  two  men 
of  advanced  life,  who  were  appointed  judges  of  the  people.  Susanna  was 
a  woman  of  great  beauty,  and  each  one  of  the  two  judges,  ignorant  of  the 
feelings  of  the  other,  fell  violently  in  love  with  her.  They  both  observed 
that  at  a  certain  lime  of  the  day  she  walked  in  the  garden,  and  both,  un- 
known to  each  other,  resolved  to  follow  her  into  the  garden.  They  pro- 
posed, therefore,  to  each  other  to  return  to  their  own  homes,  and  both; 
after  having  gone  away,  returned  again,  and  then,  surprised  at  this,  thej 
each  declared  their  love  for  Susanna,  and  agreed  to  watch  for  the  time 
when  she  should  enter  the  garden,  and  then  to  accomplish  their  purpose. 
She  entered  the  garden  as  usual  for  the  purpose  of  bathing,  and  the  elders, 
having  hid  themselves,  suddenly  came  upon  her,  and  threatened  her  with 
death  if  she  would  not  gratify  their  desires.  She,  rather  than  yield, 
calmly  made  up  her  mind  to  die,  but  gave  the  alarm  by  crying  aloud,  and 
the  elders,  to  save  themselves,  declared  that  they  found  a  young  man 
with  her  in  the  garden,  and  the  matter  coming  before  the  people,  she  was 
condemned  to  death,  and  was  led  forth  to  be  executed.  At  this  juncture, 
Daniel  appeared,  who  proposed  to  examine  the  elders  anew,  and  to  do  it 
separately.  In  this  examination,  one  of  them  testified  that  what  he  had 
seen  occurred  under  a  mastick  or  lentisk  tree,  the  other  that  it  was  under 
a  holm  tree.  The  consequence  was,  that  Susanna  was  discharged,  and 
the  two  elders  themselves  put  to  death. 

This  story  is  said,  in  the  common  version  of  the  Apocrypha,  to  be  "  set 
apart  from  the  beginning  of  Daniel  because  it  is  not  in  the  Hebrew."  It 
is  found  only  in  the  Apocrypha,  and  is  not  incorporated  in  the  Greek 
translation  of  Daniel. 

(3.)  The  third  addition  is  what  is  called  "  The  History  of  the  Destruc- 
tion of  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  cut  off  from  the  end  of  Daniel." 

This  is  a  story  in  two  parts.  The  first  relates  to  Bel,  the  idol  god  of 
the  Babylonians.  A  large  quantity  of  food  was  daily  placed  before  the 
idol  in  the  temple,  which  it  was  supposed  the  idol  consumed.  The 
inquiry  was  made  of  Daniel  by  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  why  ho  did  not 
worship  the  idol.  Daniel  replied,  that  he  was  permitted  by  his  religion 
to  worship  only  the  living  God.  Cj'rus  asked  him  whether  Bel  was  not 
a  living  God  ;  and,  in  proof  of  it,  appealed  to  the  large  quantity  of  food 
which  he  daily  consumed.  Daniel  smiled  at  the  simplicity  of  the  king, 
and  aflirmed  that  the  god  was  only  brass  and  clay,  and  could  devour 
nothing.  The  king,  enraged,  called  for  the  priests  of  Bel,  and  insisted 
on  being  informed  who  ate  the  large  quantity  of  food  that  was  daily 
placed  before  the  idol.  They,  of  course,  affirmed  that  it  was  the  idol, 
and  proposed  that  a  test  should  be  applied  by  placing  the  food  before 
him  as  usual,  and  by  having  the  temple  carefully  closed  and  sealed  with 
the  signet  of  the  king.  Under  the  table  they  had,  however,  made  a 
i  7 


LXXrv  INTRODUCTION. 

private  entrance,  and,  in  order  to  detect  them,  Daniel  caused  ashes  to  be 
sprinkled  on  the  floor,  -which,  on  the  following  day,  revealed  the  foot» 
prints  of  men,  women,  and  children,  who  had  secretly  entered  the  temple, 
and  consumed  the  food.  The  consequence  was,  that  they  were  put  to 
death,  and  Bel  and  his  temple  were  delivered  to  Daniel,  who  destroyed 
them  both. 

The  other  part  of  the  story  relates  to  a  great  dragon  which  was  wor- 
shipped in  Babylon.  The  king  said  that  it  could  not  be  affirmed  that  this 
dragon  was  made  of  brass,  or  that  he  was  not  a  living  being,  and  required 
Daniel  to  worship  him.  Daniel  still  declared  that  he  would  worship  only 
the  living  God,  and  proposed  to  put  the  dragon  to  death.  This  he  did  by 
Ittaking  a  ball  of  pitch,  and  fat,  and  hair,  and  putting  it  in  the  mouth 
of  the  dragon,  so  that  he  burst  asunder.  A  tumult,  in  consequence  of 
the  destruction  of  Bel  and  the  dragon,  was  excited  against  the  king,  and 
the  mob  came  and  demanded  Daniel,  who  had  been  the  cause  of  this. 
Daniel  was  delivered  to  them,  and  was  thrown  into  the  den  of  lions,  where 
he  remained  six  days ;  and,  in  order  that  the  lions  might  at  onoe  devour 
him,  their  appetites  had  been  sharpened  by  having  been  fed  each  day 
with  "  two  carcasses"  —  in  the  margin,  "two  slaves"  —  and  two  sheep. 
At  this  juncture,  it  is  said  that  there  was  in  Jewry  a  prophet,  by  the 
name  of  Ilabbacuc,  who  had  made  pottage,  and  was  going  with  it  into  a  field 
to  carry  it  to  the  reapers.  lie  was  directed  by  an  angel  of  the  Lord  to  take 
it  to  Babylon  to  Daniel,  who  was  in  the  lions'  den.  The  prophet  answered 
that  he  never  saw  Babylon,  and  knew  not  where  the  den  was.  So  the 
angel  of  the  Lord  took  him  by  the  crown,  and  bare  him  by  the  hair  of  his 
head,  and  placed  him  in  Babylon  over  the  den.  He  gave  Daniel  the  food, 
and  was  immediately  restored  to  his  own  place  in  Judea.  On  the  seventh 
day  the  king  went  to  bewail  Daniel ;  found  him  alive ;  drew  him  out,  and 
threw  in  those  who  had  caused  him  to  be  placed  there,  who  were,  of  course, 
at  once  devoured. 

This  foolish  story  is  said,  in  the  title,  in  the  common  version  of  the 
Apocrypha,  to  have  been  "  cut  off  from  the  end  of  Daniel."  Like  the 
Prayer  of  the  Three  Children,  and  the  History  of  Susanna,  it  is  found 
only  in  Greek,  in  which  language  it  was  undoubtedly  written. 

In  respect  to  these  additions  to  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  the  question 
whether  they  are  entitled  to  be  regarded  as  a  part  of  his  genuine  work, 
and  to  have  a  place  in  the  inspired  writings,  the  following  remarks  may 
now  be  made  : — 

(a)  Neither  of  them,  and  no  portion  of  them,  is  found  in  the  Hebrew 
or  the  Chaldee,  nor  is  there  the  slightest  evidence  that  they  had  a 
Hebrew  or  Chaldee  original.  There  is  no  historical  proof  that  they 
ever  existed  in  either  of  these  languages,  and,  of  course,  no  proof  that 
they  ever  formed  a  part  of  the  genuine  work  of  Daniel.  If  they  were 
wa-itten  originally  in  Greek,  and  if  the  evidence  above  adduced  that  th« 
Book  of  Daniel  was  written  in  the  time  of  the  exile  is  conclusive,  then 
it  is  clear  that  these  additions  were  not  written  by  Daniel  himself,  and 
of  course  that  they  were  not  entitled  to  a  place  among  the  inspired 
records.  Tor  the  Greek  language  was  not  understood  in  Babylon  to  any 
considerable  extent,  if  at  all,  until  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  and 
his  conquests  in  the  East ;  and  it  is  every  way  certain,  that  a  book  written 
in  Babylon  in  the  time  of  the  exile  would  not  have  been  written  in  Greek. 


INTRODUCTION.  LXXV 

The  evidence  is  conclusive  that  these  additions  were  never  auy  part  of 
the  genuine  Book  of  Daniel ;  and,  of  course,  that  they  have  no  claim  to  a 
place  in  the  canon.  Moreover,  as  they  constituted  no  part  of  that  book, 
none  of  the  evidence  urged  in  favor  of  the  canonical  authority  of  that 
book  can  be  urged  in  behalf  of  these  stories,  and  any  claim  that  they 
may  have  must  rest  on  their  own  merits. 

(b)  They  have  no  claim,  on  their  own  account,  to  a  place  in  the  canon. 
Their  authors  are  unknown.  The  time  of  their  composition  is  unknown. 
TheyAvere  never  recognized  by  the  Jews  as  canonical,  and  never  had  the 
sanction  of  the  Saviour  and  the  apostles,  as  they  are  never  quoted  or 
alluded  to  in  the  New  Testament.  And  they  have  no  internal  evidence 
that  they  are  of  divine  origin.  There  is  no  evidence  which  could  be 
urged  in  favour  of  their  claims  to  a  place  in  the  canonical  Scriptures  which 
20uld  not  be  urged  in  fixvour  of  the  whole  of  the  Apocrypha,  or  which 
could  not  be  urged  in  favour  of  any  anonymous  writings  of  antiquity. 
The  only  ground  of  claim  which  could  be  urged  for  the  admission  of  these 
stories  into  the  sacred  canon  would  be,  that  they  were  a  part  of  the 
genuine  Book  of  Daniel ;  but  this  claim  never  can  be  made  out  by  any 
possibility. 

(c)  In  common  with  the  other  books  of  the  Apocrypha,  these  books 
were  rejected  by  the  early  Christian  writers,  and  were  not  admitted  into 
the  canon  of  Scripture  during  the  first  four  centuries  of  the  Christian 
church.  See  Home's  Introduction,  i.  628.  Some  of  the  books  of  the 
Apocrypha  were  indeed  quoted  by  some  of  the  Fathers  with  respect 
(Lardner,  iv.  331),  particularly  by  Ambrose  (who  lived  A.  D.  340-397), 
but  they  are  referred  to  by  Jerome  only  to  be  censured  and  condemned 
(Lardner,  iv.  424,  440,  4G6-472),  and  are  mentioned  only  with  contempt 
by  Augustine.     Lardner  iv.  499. 

It  is  seldom  that  these  additions  to  Daniel  in  the  Apocrypha  are  quoted 
or  alluded  to  at  all  by  the  early  Christian  writers,  but  when  they  are  it  is 
only  that  they  maybe  condemned.  Origen,  indeed,  refers  to  the  story  of 
Susanna  as  a  true  history,  and,  in  a  letter  to  Africanus,  says  of  it,  "  That 
the  story  of  Susanna,  being  dishonorable  to  the  Jewish  elders,  it  was  sup- 
pressed by  their  great  men  ;  and  that  there  were  many  things  kept,  as 
much  IS  might  be,  from  the  knowledge  of  the  people,  some  of  which, 
nevertl  eless,  were  preserved  in  some  apocryphal  books."  Lardner,  ii. 
466.  Origen,  indeed,  in  the  words  of  Dr.  Lardner,  "  Says  all  he  caa 
think  of  to  prove  the  history  [of  Susanna]  true  and  genuine,  and  affirms 
that  it  was  made  use  of  in  Greek  by  all  the  churches  of  Christ  among  the 
Gentiles ;  yet  he  owns  that  it  was  not  received  by  the  Jews,  nor  to  be 
found  in  their  copies  of  the  Book  of  Daniel."  Lardner,  ii.  541,  542. 
Comp.  also  Du  Pin,  Dissertation  Preliminaire  sur  la  Bible,  Liv.  i.,  ch.  i. 
Beet.  5,  p.  15,  note  [e).  To  the  arguments  of  Origen  on  the  subject, 
Africanus  replies,  that  "  he  wondered  that  he  did  not  know  that  the  book 
was  spurious,  and  says  it  was  a  piece  lately  forged."  Lardner  ii.  541. 
The  other  books — the  Prayer  of  the  Three  Children  and  the  Story  of  Bel 
and  the  Dragon  —  I  do  not  find,  from  Lardner,  to  have  been  quoted  or 
referred  to  at  all  by  the  early  Christian  writers. 

(d)  The  foolishness  and  manifest  fiibulousness  of  the  Story  of  Bel  and 
the  Dragon,  may  be  referred  to  as  a  proof  that  that  cannot  be  a  part  of 
the  genuine  Book  of  Daniel,  or  entitled  to  a  place  among  books  claiming 


LXXVI  INTRODUCTION. 

to  be  inspired.  It  has  every  mark  of  being  a  fable,  and  is  wholly  un^ 
■worthy  a  place  in  any  volume  claiming  to  be  of  divine  origin,  or  any 
volume  of  respectable  authorship  vs'hatever. 

(e)  Little  is  known  of  the  origin  of  these  books,  and  little  importance 
can  be  attached  to  them,  but  it  may  be  of  some  use  to  know  the  place 
which  they  have  commonly  occupied  in  the  Bible  by  those  who  have  re- 
ceived them  as  a  part  of  the  canon,  and  the  place  where  they  are  com- 
monly found  in  the  version  of  the  Scriptures. 

"  The  Song  of  the  Three  Children"  is  placed  in  the  Greek  version  of 
Daniel,  and  also  in  the  Latin  Vulgate,  between  the  twenty-third  and 
twenty-fourth  verses  of  the  third  chapter.  "  It  has  always  been  ad- 
mired," says  Home  (Intro,  iv.  217,  218),  "  for  the  piety  of  its  sentiments, 
but  it  was  never  admitted  to  be  canonical,  until  it  was  recognised  by  the 
Council  of  Trent.  The  fifteenth  verse  ['  Neither  is  there  at  this  time 
prince,  or  prophet,  or  leader,  or  burnt-offering,  or  sacrifice,  or  oblation, 
or  incense,  or  place  to  sacrifice  before  thee,  and  to  find  mercy'],  contains  a 
direct  falsehood  ;  for  it  asserts  that  there  was  no  prophet  at  that  time,  when 
it  is  well  known  that  Daniel  and  Ezekiel  both  exercised  the  prophetic 
ministry  in  Babylon.  This  Apjocryphal  fragment  is,  therefore,  most  pro- 
bably the  production  of  a  Hellenistic  Jew.  The  Hymn  (vs.  20,  seq.)  re- 
sembles the  hundred  and  forty-eighth  Psalm,  and  was  so  approved  of  by 
the  compilers  of  the  Liturgy,  that  in  the  first  Common  Prayer  Book  of 
Edward  VI.  they  appointed  it  to  be  used  instead  of  the  Te  l)eum  during 
Lent." 

"  The  History  of  Susanna  has  always  been  treated  with  some  respect, 
but  has  never  been  considered  as  canonical,  though  the  Council  of  Trent 
admitted  it  into  the  number  of  the  sacred  books.  It  is  evidently  the  work 
of  some  Hellenistic  Jew,  and  in  the  Vulgate  version  it  forms  the  thirteenth 
chapter  of  the  Book  of  Daniel.  In  the  Septuagiut  version  it  is  placed  at 
the  beginning  of  that  book."     Home,  iv.  218. 

"  The  History  of  the  Destruction  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  was  always 
rejected  by  the  Jewish  Church ;  it  is  not  extant  either  in  the  Hebrew  or 
the  Chaldee  language.  Jerome  gives  it  no  better  title  than  The  Fable  of 
Bel  and  the  Dragon;  nor  has  it  obtained  more  credit  with  posterity, 
except  with  the  Fathers  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  who  determined  it  to  be 
a  part  of  the  canonical  Scriptures.  This  book  forms  the  fourteenth 
chapter  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  in  the  Latin  Vulgate  ;  in  the  Greek,  it  was 
called  the  Prophecy  of  Ilabakkuk,  the  son  of  Jesus,  of  the  tribe  of  Levi. 
There  are  two  Greek  texts  of  this  fragment,  that  of  the  Septuagint,  and 
that  found  in  Theodotion's  Greek  version  of  Daniel.  The  former  is  the 
most  ancient,  and  has  been  translated  into  Syriac.  The  Latin  and  Arabic 
versions,  together  with  another  Syriac  translation,  have  been  made  from 
the  text  of  Theodotion."  Home,  iv.  218.  These  additions  to  Daniel 
may  be  found  in  Greek,  Arabic,  Syriac,  and  Latin,  in  Walton's  Polyglott, 
torn.  iv. 

i  6.  THE  ANCIENT  VERSIONS  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL. 

(1.)  Of  these  the  oldest,  of  course,  is  the  Septuagint.  For  a  general 
account  of  this  version,  see  Intro,  to  Isaiah,  §  8,  I.  (1).  Of  the  author 
pf  that  portion  of  the  Septuagint  version  which  comprised  the  Book  of 


INTRODUCTION.  LXXYH 

Daniel — for  no  one  can  doubt  that  the  Septuagint  was  the  work  of  dif- 
ferent authors — we  have  now  no  information.  The  translation  of  Daniel 
was  among  the  least  faithful,  and  was  the  most  erroneous,  of  the  Avholo 
collection;  and,  indeed,  it  was  so  imperfect  that  its  use  in  the  church  was 
early  superseded  by  the  version  of  Theodotion — the  version  which  is  now 
found  in  the  editions  of  the  Septuagint. 

The  Septuagint  translation  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  was  for  a  long  time 
supposed  to  be  lost,  and  it  is  only  at  a  comparatively  recent  period  that 
it  has  been  recovered  and  published.  For  a  considerable  period  before 
the  time  of  Jerome,  the  version  by  the  lxx.  had  been  superseded  by  that 
of  Thcodt)tion,  doubtless  on  account  of  the  great  imperfection  of  the 
former,  though  it  is  probable  that  its  disuse  was  gradual.  Jerome,  in 
his  Preface  to  the  Book  of  Daniel,  says,  indeed,  that  it  was  not  known 
to  him  on  what  ground  this  happened — "  Danielem  prophetam  juxta 
LXX.  interpretcs  ecclesice  non  Icgunt,  et  lioc  cur  accident,  nescio," — but 
it  is  in  every  way  probable  that  it  was  on  account  of  the  great  imperfec- 
tion of  the  translation,  for  Jerome  himself  says,  "Hoc  unum  affirmare, 
quod  multum  a  veritate  discordet  et  recto  judicio  repudiata  sit."  He 
adds,  therefore,  that  though  Theodotion  was  understood  to  be  an  7inbe- 
liever — "  post  adventem  Christi  incredulus  fuit" — yet  that  his  translation 
Avas  preferred  to  that  of  the  lxx.  "  lUud  quoque  lectorem  admoneo, 
Danielem  non  juxta  lxx.  interpretes,  sed  juxta  Theodotionem  ecclesias 
legere,  qui  utique  post  adventura  Christi  incredulus  fuit.  Unde  judicio 
magistrorum  ecclesiaj  editio  eorum  in  hoc  volumine  repudiata  est,  et 
Theodotionis  vulgo  legitur,  quas  et  Hebraeo  et  ceteris  translatoribus 
congruit." 

From  this  cause  it  happened  that  the  translation  of  Daniel  by  the  lxx. 
went  into  entire  disuse,  and  was  for  a  long  time  supposed  to  have  been 
destroyed.  It  has,  however,  been  recovered  and  published,  though  it  has 
not  been  substituted  in  the  editions  of  the  Septuagint  in  the  place  of  the 
version  by  Theodotion.  A  copy  of  the  old  version  by  the  lxx.  was  found 
in  the  Chisian  library  at  Rome,  in  a  single  manuscript  (Codex  Chisianus), 
and  was  published  in  Rome,  in  folio,  in  the  year  1772,  under  the  title, 
Daniel  Secundum  lxx.  ex  tetraplis  Origenis  nunc  primum  editus  e  singu- 
lari  Chisiano  Codice  annorum  supra  dccc.  Romte,  1772.  fol.  This  was 
republished  at  Goettinburg,  in  1773,  and  again  in  1774.  These  editions 
were  prepared  by  J.  D.  Michaelis,  the  former  containing  the  text  only,  the 
latter  with  the  text  of  the  lxx.,  the  version  of  Theodotion,  the  interpre- 
tation of  Ilippolytus,  a  Latin  version,  and  the  annotations  of  the  Roman 
editor. 

These  editions  were  published  from  one  manuscript,  and  without  any 
attempt  to  correct  the  text  by  a  comparison  with  other  versions.  The 
text  is  supposed  to  have  been  corrupted,  so  that,  as  Hahn  says,  no  one  can 
bslieve  that  this  codex  exhibits  it  as  it  was  when  the  version  was  made. 
"  This  corruption,"  says  he,  "  exists  not  only  in  particular  words  and 
phrases,  but  in  the  general  disarrangement  and  disorder  of  the  whole 
text,  so  that  those  parts  are  separated  which  ought  to  be  united,  and 
those  parts  united  which  ought  to  be  kept  distinct.  Besides  this,  there 
was  entire  inattention  to  the  signs  which  Origen  had  used  in  his  edition  of 
the  Septuagint."  Pi-ef.  to  Daniel,  Kara  tov;  EfilojiriKouTa.  As  there  was  but 
ane  manuscript,  all  hope  of  correcting  the  text  in  the  way  in  which  it 
7* 


LXXVni  INTRODUCTION. 

has  been  done  in  the  other  parts  of  the  Septuagint,  and  in  other  versions, 
by  a  comparison  of  manuscripts,  was,  of  course,  out  of  the  question. 

After  four  editions  of  the  work  had  been  published,  it  happened  that, 
in  the  Ambrosian  Library  at  Mailand,  Cajetan  Bugati  discovered  a 
Syriac  Hexaplar  manuscript,  written  in  the  year  G16,  or  617,  after  Christ, 
which  embraced  the  Hagiography,  and  the  prophetic  books,  and,  among 
others,  "  Daniel,  according  to  the  Septuagint  Translation."  The  title  of 
this  Syriac  version,  as  translated  by  Hahn,  is  as  follows:  "Explicit  liber 
Danielis  prophetae,  qui  conversus  est  ex  traditione  rdv  Septuaginta 
duorum,  qui  in  diebus  Ptolemcei  regis  iEgypti  ante  adventum  Christi 
annis  centum  plus  minus  verterunt  libros  sanctos  de  lingua  Hebraeorum, 
in  Grsecum,  in  Alexandria  civitate  magna.  Versus  est  autem  liber  iste 
etiam  de  Graeco  in  Syriacum,  in  Alexandria  civitate  mense  Canun  pos- 
teriori anni  nongentesimi  vicesimi  octavi  Alexandri  indictione  quinta 
(i.  e.  a  617,  p.  ch.)."  This  professes,  therefore,  to  be  a  Syriac  translation 
of  the  Septuagint  version  of  Daniel.  This  version  was  found  to  be  in  good 
preservation,  and  the  signs  adopted  by  Origen  to  determine  the  value  of  the 
text  were  preserved,  and  a  new  edition  of 'the  Greek  translation  was  pub- 
lished, corrected  by  this,  under  the  title :  Daniel  Secundum  editionem  lxx. 
interpretum  ex  tetraplis  desumptum.  Rom.,  1788.  This  Syriac  version 
enabled  the  editor  to  correct  many  places  that  were  defective,  and  to  do 
much  towards  furnishing  a  more  perfect  text.  Still  the  work  was,  in 
many  respects,  imperfect ;  and,  from  all  the  aids  within  his  reach,  and 
probably  all  that  can  now  be  hoped  for,  Hahn  published  a  new  edition  of 
the  work,  corrected  in  many  more  places  (see  them  enumerated  in  his 
Preface,  p.  ix.),  under  the  following  title:  aaniua /cara  rouj E/?(5o//;))fovra. 
E  Codice  Chisiano  post  Segaarium  edidit  secundum  versionem  Syriaco- 
Hexaplarem  recognivit  annotationibus  criticis  et  philologicis  illustravit 
Henricus  Augustus  Hahn,  Philosophiae  Doctor  et  Theologiae  candi- 
datus.  Lipsise,  cioiocccxlv.  This  is  now  the  most  perfect  edition  of 
the  Septuagint  version  of  Daniel,  but  still  it  cannot  be  regarded  as  of 
great  critical  value  in  the  interpretation  of  the  book.  It  has  been  used 
in  the  preparation  of  this  commentary.  An  account  of  the  instances  in 
which  it  departs  from  the  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  original  may  be  seen  at 
length  in  Lengerke,  Das  Buck  Daniel,  Einleitung,  pp.  cix-cxiv.  It  has 
the  Prayer  of  the  Three  Children,  inserted  in  the  usual  place  (ch.  iii.  23, 
24),  and  the  History  of  Susanna,  and  the  Destruction  of  Bel  and  the 
Dragon,  as  separate  pieces,  at  the  end. 

(2.)  The  transl.ation  of  Theodotion.  This  is  that  which  has  been  sub- 
stituted in  the  Septuagint  for  the  version  above  referred  to,  and  which  is 
found  in  the  various  editions  of  the  Septuagint,  and  in  the  Polyglott 
Bibles.  Theodotion  was  a  native  of  Ephesus,  and  is  termed  by  Eusebius 
an  Ebonite,  or  Semi-Christian.  Jerome,  as  we  have  seen  above,  regarded 
him  as  an  unbeliever — post  adventum  Christi  incredulus  fuit : — that  is, 
he  remained  an  unbeliever  after  the  coming  of  Christ ;  propably  meaning 
that  ho  was  a  Jew  by  birth,  and  remained  unconvinced  that  Jesus  was 
the  Messiah.  He  was  nearly  contemporary  with  Aquila,  who  was  ths 
author  of  a  Greek  translation  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  who  was  also 
of  Jewish  descent.  The  Jews  were  dissatisfied  with  the  Septuagint 
Version  as  being  too  paraphrastic,  and  Aquila  undertook  to  make  a  literal 
version,  but  without  any  regard  to  the  genius  of  the  Greek  language. 


INTRODUCTION.  LXXIX 

We  have  only  some  fragments  of  the  version  by  Aquila.  The  version  of 
Theodotion  is  less  literal  than  that  of  Aquila  —  holding  a  middle  rank 
between  the  servile  closeness  of  Aquila,  and  the  freedom  of  Symmachus. 
This  version  is  cited  by  Justin  Martyr,  in  his  Dialogue  with  Tryphon, 
the  Jew,  -which  was  composed  about  the  year  160.  The  version  of 
Theodotion  is  a  kind  of  revision  of  the  Septuagint,  and  supplies  some  defi- 
ciencies in  the  Septuagint,  but  the  author  shows  that  he  was  indifferently 
skilled  in  Hebrew.  It  is  evident,  that  in  his  translation  Theodotion 
made  great  use  of  both  the  previous  versions,  that  by  the  Lxx.,  and  that 
of  Aquila  ;  that  he  followed  sometimes  the  diction  of  the  one,  and  some- 
times that  of  the  other  ;  that  he  often  mingled  them  together  in  the  com- 
pass of  the  same  verse  ;  and  that  he  adapted  the  quotations  from  the  two 
versions  to  his  own  style.  As  his  style  was  similar  to  that  of  the  lxx., 
Origen,  in  his  Hexapla,  perhaps  for  the  sake  of  uniformity,  supplied  the 
additions  which  he  inserted  in  his  work  chiefly  from  this  version.  There 
are  but  few  fragments  of  these  versions  now  remaining.  See  Home, 
Intro,  iv.  171-176.  Lengerke  supposes  that  Theodotion  was  a  Christian, 
p.  cxv.  From  this  translation  of  Theodotion,  a  version  was  made  in 
Arabic,  in  the  tenth  century.     Lengerke,  p.  cxv. 

(3.)  The  Syriac  versions.  For  the  general  character  of  these  versions, 
see  Intro,  to  Isaiah,  §  8,  (3).  There  is  nothing  remarkable  in  these 
versions  of  Daniel.  For  an  account  of  a  later  Syriac  version  of  the 
Septuagint,  see  the  remarks  above.  "  As  Daniel  has  no  Targum  or  Chaldee 
version,  the  Syriac  version  performs  a  valuable  service  in  the  explanation 
of  Hebrew  words."     Prof.  Stuart,  p.  491. 

(4.)  The  Latin  Vulgate.  For  the  general  character  of  this,  see  Intro, 
to  Isa.  §  8,  (2).  As  this  contains  the  Apocryphal  portions,  the  Prayer 
of  the  Three  Children,  the  History  of  Susanna,  and  the  Destruction  of 
Bel  and  the  Dragon,  and  as  the  Latin  Vulgate  was  declared  canonical 
by  the  Council  of  Trent,  of  course  those  fragments  have  received  the 
sanction  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  as  a  part  of  the  inspired  records. 
This  version,  as  a  whole,  is  superior  to  any  of  the  other  ancient  versions, 
and  shows  a  more  thorough  knowledge  than  any  of  them  of  the 
tenor  and  nature  of  the  book.  "  An  invaluable  service  has  Jerome  done, 
by  the  translation  of  Daniel,  and  by  his  commentary  on  the  book."  Prof. 
Stuart,  p.  491. 

(5.)  The  Arabic  version.  For  an  account  of  the  Arabic  versions,  see 
Intro,  to  Isaiah,  ^  8,  (4).  There  is  nothing  peculiar  in  the  Arabic  ver- 
sion of  Daniel. 


§  7.  EXEGETICAL  HELPS  TO  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL. 

Besides  the  versions  above  referred  to,  I  have  made  use  of  the  following 
exegetical  helps  to  the  Book  of  Daniel,  in  the  preparation  of  these  Notes. 
The  order  in  which  they  are  mentioned  is  not  designed  to  express  any- 
thing in  regard  to  their  value,  but  is  adopted  more  for  the  sake  of  con- 
t^enience : — 

Critici  Sacri.     Tom.  iv. 

Calvin,  Prselectiones  in  Daniel.    Works,  vol.  v.,  ed.  Amsterdam,  1667. 


LXXX  INTRODUCTION. 

Jerome,  Commentary  on  Daniel.     Works,  torn,  iv.,  ed.  Paris,  1623. 

The  Pictorial  Bible  (Dr.  Kitto).     London,  183G. 

Bush's  Illustrations  of  Scripture.     Brattleboro,  1836. 

Dr.  Gill,  Commentaries.     Vol.  vi.,  ed.  Philadelphia,  1819. 

Hengstenberg's  Christology,  translated  by  the  Rev.  Reuel  Keith,  D.  D, 
Alexandria,  1836. 

Newton  on  the  Prophecies.     London,  1832. 

Einleitung  in  das  Alte  Testament.  Von  Johann  Gottfried  Eichhorn, 
Vierter  Band,  I  612-619. 

Daniel  aus  dem  IIcbrUish-Aramaischen  neu  ubersctzt  und  erklart  mii 
einer  voUstandigen  Einleitung,  und  einigen  historischen  und  exegetischen 
Excursen,  Von  Leonhard  Bertholdt.     Erlangen,  1806. 

Das  Buch  Daniel  Verdeutscht  und  Ausleget  Von  Dr.  Caesar  Ton 
Lengerke,  Professor  der  Theologias  zu  Konigsburg  in  Pr.  Konigsberg, 
1835. 

Commentarius  Grammaticus  in  Vetus  Testamentum  in  usum  maxima 
Gymnasiorum  et  Academiarum  adornatus.  Scripsit  Franc.  Jos.  Valent. 
Dominic.  Maurer.  Phil.  Doct.  Soc.  Historico-TIieol.  Lips.  Sod.  Ord, 
Volumen  Secundum.     Lipsise,  1838. 

Isaaci  Newtoni  ad  Danielis  Profetoe  Vaticinia.  Oposcula,  torn,  iii., 
1744. 

Lehrbuch  der  Historish-Kritischen  Einleitung  in  die  kanonishen  und 
Apokryphischen  Bdcher  des  Alten  Testamentes.  Von  Wilhelm  Martin 
Leberect  De  Wette,  |  253-259.     Berlin,  1845. 

In  Danielem  Prophetam  Commentarius  editus  a  Philippo  Melanthone, 
Anno  M.  D.  XLIII.  Corpus  Eeformatorum,  Bretschneider,  vol.  xiii., 
1846. 

Ueber  Verfasser  und  der  Zweck  des  Buches  Daniel.  Theologische 
Zeitschrift.  Drittcs  Heft.  Berlin,  1822,  pp.  181-294.  By  Dr.  Fried. 
Lucke. 

Comraentatio  Ilistorico-Critica  Exhibeus  descrlptionem  et  censuram 
recentium  de  Danielis  Libro  Opinionum,  Auctore  Henrico  Godofredo 
Kirmss,  Saxone  Seminarii  Theologici  Sodali.     Jense,  1828. 

Die  Authentic  des  Daniel.  Von  Ernst  Wilhelm  Hengstenberg. 
Berlin,  1831. 

The  Season  and  Time,  or  an  Exposition  of  the  Prophecies  which  relate 
to  the  two  periods  of  Daniel  subsequent  to  the  1260  years  now  recently 
expired.     By  W.  Ettrick,  A.  M.     London,  1816. 

An  Essay  towards  an  Interpretation  of  the  Prophecies  of  Daniel.  Bj 
Richard  Amner.     London,  1776. 

Neue  Kritishe  Untersuchungen  iiber  des  Buch  Daniel.  Von  Heinrich 
Ililvernick,  der  Theologie  Doctor  und  A.  0.  Professor  an  der  Universitat 
Rostock.     Hamburgh,  1838. 

An  Exposition  of  such  of  the  Prophecies  of  Daniel  as  receive  their  ac 
eomplishment  under  the  New  Testament.  By  the  late  Rev.  Magnus 
Frederic    Roos   A.  M.,    Supcrintendant  and   Prelate   in   Lustnan   and 


INTRODUCTION.  LXXXl 

Anhausen.      Translated  from    the   German,    by   Ebenezer  Henderson. 
Edinburgh,  1811. 

A  Description  accompanying  an  hieroglyphical  print  of  Daniel's  Great 
Image.     London. 

Daniel,  his  Chaldie  Visions  and  his  Ebrew:  both  translated  after 
the  original,  and  expounded  both,  by  the  reduction  of  heathen^  most 
famous  stories,  ^Yith  the  exact  proprietie  of  his  wordes  (which  is  the 
surest  certaintie  what  he  must  meane) :  and  joining  all  the  Bible  and 
learned  tongues  to  the  frame  of  his  Worko  London,  1596.  By  Hugh 
Broughton. 

Observations  intended  to  point  out  the  application  of  Prophecy  in  tho 
eleventh  chapter  of  Daniel  to  the  French  Power.  London,  1800. 
Author  unknown. 

An  Apologie  in  Briefe  Assertions  defending  that  our  Lord  died  in  the 
time  properly  fortold  to  Daniel.  For  satisfaction  to  some  studentos  in 
both  Universities.     By  H.  Broughton.     London,  1592. 

As  Essay  in  Scripture  Prophecy,  wherein  it  is  endeavoured  to  explain 
the  three  periods  contained  in  the  xiith  chapter  of  the  Prophet  Daniel, 
with  some  arguments  to  make  it  probable  that  the  -first  of  the  j^eriods  did 
expire  in  the  year  1715.  Printed  in  the  year  1715.  Author  and  place 
unknown. 

Daniel,  an  Improved  Version  attempted,  with  a  Preliminary  Disser- 
tation, and  Notes,  critical,  historical,  and  explanatory.  By  Thomas 
Wintle,  B.  D.,  Rector  of  BrightwaU,  in  Berkshire,  and  Fellow  of  Pem- 
broke College.     Oxford,  1792. 

Hermann!  Venema  Commentarius,  ad  Danielis  cap.  xi.  4-45,  et  xii. 
1-3.     Leovardios,  1752. 

A  Chronological  Treatise  upon  the  Seventy  Weeks  of  Daniel.  By 
Benjamin  Marshall,  M.  A.,  Rector  Naunton,  in  Gloucestershire.  Lon- 
don, 1725. 

The  Times  of  Daniel,  Chronological  and  Prophetical,  examined  with 
relation  to  the  point  of  contact  between  Sacred  and  Profane  Chronology. 
By  George,  Duke  of  Manchester,  London,  1845. 

Prof.  Stuart's  Commentary  on  Daniel,  Boston,  1850,  was  not  pub- 
lished until  after  the  "  Notes"  or  Commentary  in  this  work  had  been 
written.  I  have  consulted  it  carefully  in  revising  the  manuscript  for  the 
press. 

To  these  works,  which  I  have  consulted  feely,  in  proportion  to  what 
seemed  to  me  their  respective  worth,  and  to  such  collateral  exegetical 
helps  in  addition  as  I  have  access  to  in  my  own  library,  the  following 
works  are  referred  to  by  De  Wette,  Lehrbuch,  pp.  378,  379,  as  valuable 
aids  in  interpreting  Daniel : — 

Ephraem,  d.  S.  Ausleg.  des  Proph.  Daniel,  0pp.  ii.  203,  seq. 

Theodoret,  Comment,  in  Visiones  Dan.  Proph.  0pp.  ed.  Sculz.  ii 
lG53j  seq. 


LXXXII  INTRODUCTION. 

Paraph.  Joseph!    Jachidse   in  Dan.    c.  Vers,   et    Annotatt.    Ccnet 
I'Empereur.     Amst.  1633. 

Prjelectt.  Acad,  in  Dan.  Proph.  habitse  a  Mart.  Geir.     Lips.  16G7,  ed. 
corr.  84. 

H.  Venem.  Dissertatt.  ad  Vatice.  Danielis,  c.  ii.  vii.  et  viii.    Leov. 
1745 

Chr.  B.  Michasl.  Annotatt.  in  Dan.  in  J.  H.  Michael.  Ueberr.  Annotatt. 
in  Hagiogr.  iii.  1,  seq. 

Ptosenmiiller  BchoL 


THE 


BOOK  OF  DANIEL. 


CHAPTER  I. 

g  1.   AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  CHAPTER. 

f  .w  <Aiv  fonoial  argument  in  favour  of  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the  Booli  cf  Daniel, 
»e<j  laijjr*.,  <1  2,  3.  To  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  each  particular  chapter  in  detail, 
howe-ser,  objections,  derived  fl-om  something  peculiar  in  each  chapter,  have  been  urged,  which 
it  is  propor  to  rteet,  and  which  I  propose  to  consider  in  a  particular  introduction  to  the  re- 
spective chapters.  These  objections  it  is  proper  to  consider,  not  so  much  because  they  have 
been  urged  by  distinguished  German  critics — De  Wette,  Bertholdt,  Uleek,  Eichliorn,  and  others, 
— for  their  writings  will  probably  fall  into  the  hands  of  few  persons  who  will  read  these  Notes, 
hut  (a)  because  it  may  be  presumed  that  men  of  so  much  learning,  industry,  acuteness,  and 
ingenuity,  have  urged  all  the  objeetious  which  can,  with  any  appearance  of  plausibility,  be 
alleged  against  the  book ;  aud  (b)  because  the  objections  which  they  have  urged  may  be  pre- 
sumed to  be  felt,  to  a  greater  or  less  degree,  by  those  who  read  the  book,  though  they  might  not 
be  able  to  express  them  with  so  much  clearness  and  force.  There  are  numerous  objections  to 
various  portions  of  the  Scriptures  floating  in  the  minds  of  the  readers  of  the  Bible,  and  many 
difficulties  which  occur  to  Buch  readers,  which  are  not  expressed,  and  which  it  would  be  desirable 
to  remove,  and  which  it  is  the  duty  of  an  expositor  of  the  Bible,  if  he  can,  to  remove.  Sceptical 
critics,  in  general,  but  collect  and  embody,  in  a  plausible  form,  difficulties  which  are  felt  by  most 
readers  of  the  Scriptures.  It  is  for  this  reason,  and  with  a  view  to  remove  what  seems  to  fur- 
nish plausible  arguments  against  the  different  portions  of  this  book,  that  the  objections  which 
have  been  urged,  principally  by  the  authors  above  referred  to,  will  be  noticed  in  special  sections, 
preceding  the  exposition  of  each  chapter. 

The  only  objection  to  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the  first  chapter,  which  it  seems 
necessary  to  notice,  is  that  the  account  of  Daniel  in  the  chapter  is  inconsistent  with  the  mention 
of  Daniel  by  Ezekiel.  The  objection  substantially  is,  that  it  is  improbable  that  the  Daniel  who 
is  mentioned  by  Ezekiel  should  be  one  who  was  a  cotemporary  with  himself,  and  who  at  that 
time  lived  in  Babylon.  Daniel  is  three  times  mentioned  in  Ezekiel,  and  in  each  case  as  a  man 
of  eminent  piety  and  integrity ;  as  one  go  distinguished  by  his  virtues  as  to  deserve  to  be  classed 
with  the  most  eminent  of  the  patriarchs.  Thus  in  Ezek.  xiv.  li,  "Though  these  three  men, 
Noah,  Daniel,  and  Job  were  in  it,  they  should  deliver  but  their  own  souls  by  their  righteous- 
ness, saith  the  Lord  God."  So  again,  ver.  20,  "  Though  Noah,  Daniel,  and  Job  were  in  it,  as  I 
live,  saith  the  Lord  God,  they  shall  deliver  neither  son  nor  daughter,  they  shall  deliver  but  their 
own  souls  by  their  righteousness."  And  again,  ch.  xviii.  3,  speaking  of  the  prince  of  Tyre, 
"  Behold  thou  art  wiser  than  Daniel."  The  objection  urged  in  respect  to  the  mention  of  Daniel  in 
these  passages  is  substantially  this— that  if  the  account  in  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  true,  he  must 
have  been  a  cotemporary  with  Ezekiel,  and  must  have  been,  when  Ezekiel  prophesied,  a  young, 
man ;  that  it  is  incredible  that  he  should  have  gained  a  degree  of  reputation  which  would 
entitle  him  to  be  ranked  with  Noah  and  Job ;  that  he  could  not  have  been  so  well  known  as  to 
make  it  natural  or  proper  to  refer  to  him  in  the  same  connection  with  those  eminent  men ;  and 
especially  that  he  could  not  have  been  thus  known  to  the  prince  of  Tyre,  as  is  supposed  of  those 
mentioned  by  Ezekiel  in  the  passages  rrterred  to,  for  it  cannot  bo  presumed  that  a  man  so  young 
had  acquired  such  a  fame  abroad  as  to  make  it  proper  to  refer  to  him  in  this  manner  in  an 
address  to  a  heathen  prince.  This  objection  was  urged  by  Bernstein  (iiber  das  Buch  Iliob,  in 
den  Aualekten  Von  Keil  unJ  Tzschirner,  i.  3,  p.  10),  and  it  is  found  also  in  Bleek,  p.  2S4,  and 
De  Wette,  Einl.  p.  380.  De  Wette  says  that  it  is  probable  that  the  author  of  the  B(X)k  of 
Daniel  used  the  name  of  "an  ancient  mythic  or  poetic  person  falsely,"  in  order  to  illustrate  falj 
Irork. 

(83) 


84  DANIEL.  .  [B.  C.  007 

Now,  in  re'^'ard  to  this  objection,  it  may  be  remarked,  (a)  that,  according  to  all  the  accountu 
which  we  have  in  the  Bible,  Ezekiel  and  Daniel  were  cotemporary,  and  were  in  Uabylon  at  tht 
same  time.  As  Daniel,  however,  lived  a  long  time  in  Babylon  after  this,  it  is  to  be  admitted, 
bIso,  that  at  the  period  reJ'orred  to  by  Ezckiel,  he  must  have  been  comparatively  a  young  man. 
But  it  does  not  follow  that  he  might  not  then  have  had  a  well-known  character  for  piety  and 
integrity,  which  would  make  it  proper  to  mention  his  name  in  connection  with  the  most  eminent 
eaints  of  ancient  times.  If  the  account  in  the  Book  of  Daniel  itself  is  a  correct  account  of  him, 
this  will  not  be  doubted,  for  he  soon  attracted  attention  in  Babylon ;  he  soon  evinced  that  ex- 
traordinary piety  which  made  him  so  eminent  as  a  man  of  God,  and  that  extraordinary  wisdom 
which  raised  him  to  the  highest  rank  as  an  officer  of  state  in  B.'tbylou.  It  was  Tery  soon  after 
he  was  taken  to  Babylon  that  the  purpose  was  formed  to  train  him,  and  the  three  other  selected 
youths,  in  the  learning  of  the  Chaldeans  (ch.  i.  vs.  1-4),  and  that  Daniel  showed  that  he  waa 
qualified  to  pass  the  examination,  preparatory  to  his  occupying  an  honourable  place  in  the 
court  (ch.  i.  IS-'-l),  and  it  was  only  in  the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  Kebuchadnezzar  that  the 
remarkablp  -iream  occurred,  the  interpretation  of  which  gave  to  Daniel  so  much  celebrity,  ch.  ii. 
According  tt-  %  computation  of  Ilengstenberg  (Authtnlie  des  Daniel,  p.  71),  Daniel  was  taken  to 
Babylon  full  ten  years  before  the  prophecy  of  Ezekjel,  in  which  the  first  mention  of  him  was 
made,  and  if  so,  there  can  be  no  real  ground  for  the  objection  referred  to.  In  that  time,  if  the 
account  of  his  extraordinary  wisdom  is  true ;  if  he  evinced  the  character  which  it  is  said  that  he 
did  evince — and  against  this  there  in  no  intrinsic  improbability ;  and  if  he  was  exalted  to  office 
and  rank,  as  it  is  stated  that  he  was,  there  can  be  no  improbability  in  what  Ezekiel  says  of  him, 
that  he  had  a  character  which  made  it  proper  that  he  should  be  classed  with  the  most  eminent 
men  of  the  Jewish  nation.  (0)  As  to  the  objection  that  the  name  of  Daniel  could  not  have  been 
known  to  the  king  of  Tyre,  as  would  seem  to  be  implied  in  Ezek.  xxviii.  3,  it  may  be  remarked, 
that  it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  these  prophecies  were  ever  known  to  the  king  of  Tyre,  or 
that  they  were  ever  designed  to  influence  him.  The  prophecies  which  were  directed  against  the 
ancient  heathen  kings  were  uttered  and  published  among  the  Hebrew  people,  primarily  for 
their  guidance,  and  were  designed  to  furnish  to  tliem,  and  to  others  in  future  times,  arguments 
for  the  truth  of  religion,  though  they  assumed  the  form  of  direct  addresses  to  the  kings  them 
selves.  Such  an  imaginary  appeal  may  have  been  made  in  this  case  by  Kzekiel  to  the  king  of 
Tyre;  and,  in  speaking  of  him,  and  of  his  boasted  wisdom,  Ezekiel  may  have  made  the  conipa- 
risen  which  would  then  naturally  occur  to  him,  by  mentioning  him  in  connection  with  the 
most  eminent  man  for  wisdom  of  that  age.  But,  it  should  be  said,  also,  that  there  can  be  no 
certain  evidence  that  the  name  of  Daniel  was  7iot  known  to  the  king  of  Tyre,  and  no  intrinsio 
improbability  in  the  supposition  that  it  was.  If  Daniel  had  at  that  time  evinced  the  remark- 
able wisdom  at  the  court  of  Babylon  which  it  is  said  in  this  book  that  he  had ;  if  he  had  been 
raised  to  that  higli  rank  which  it  is  affirmed  he  had  reached,  there  is  no  improbability  in  sup- 
posing that  so  remarkable  a  circumstance  should  have  been  made  known  to  the  king  of  Tyre. 
Tyre  was  taken  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  B.  C.  572,  after  a  siege  of  thirteen  years,  and  it  is  in  no 
way  improbable  that  the  king  of  Tyre  would  be  made  aequ.ainted  with  what  occurred  at  the 
court  of  the  Chaldeans.  The  prophecj'  in  Ezekiel,  where  Daniel  is  mentioned  (ch.  xxviii.  3),  could 
not  have  been  uttered  long  before  Tyre  was  taken,  and,  in  referring  to  what  was  to  occur,  it  was 
not  unnatural  to  mention  the  man  most  distinguished  fqf  wisdom  at  the  court  of  Babylon,  and 
in  the  councils  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  with  the  presumption  that  his  name  and  celebrity  would 
not  be  unknown  to  the  king  of  Tyre,  (c)  As  to  the  objection  of  Bernstein,  that  it  would  be  im- 
probable, if  Daniel  lived  there,  and  if  he  was  comparatively  a  young  man,  that  his  name  would 
be  placed  between  that  of  Noah  and  Job  (Ezek.  xiv.  14),  as  if  he  had  lived  before  Job,  it  may 
be  remarked,  that  there  might  be  a  greater  similarity  between  the  circumstances  of  Noah  and 
Daniel  than  between  Noah  and  Job,  and  that  it  was  proper  to  refer  to  them  in  this  order.  But 
the  mere  circumstance  of  the  order  in  which  the  names  are  mentioned  cannot  be  adduced  as  a 
proof  that  one  of  the  persons  named  did  not  exist  at  that  time.  They  may  have  occurred  in 
this  order  to  Ezekiel,  because,  in  his  apprehensim,  that  was  the  order  in  which  the  degree  of 
their  piety  was  to  be  estimated 

To  this  objection  thus  considered,  that  the  mention  of  Daniel  in  connection  with  Noah  and 
Job  proves  that  Ezekiel  referred  to  some  one  of  ancient  times,  it  may  be  further  replied,  that, 
if  this  were  so,  it  is  impossible  to  account  for  the  fact  that  no  such  person  is  mentioned  by  any 
of  the  earlier  prophets  and  writers.  How  came  his  name  known  to  Ezekiel  ?  And  if  there  had 
be«n  a  patriarch  .so  eminent  as  to  be  ranked  with  Noah  and  Job,  how  is  it  to  be  accounted  for 
that  all  the  sacred  writers,  up  to  the  time  of  Ezekiel,  are  wholly  silent  in  regard  to  him  ?  And 
why  is  it  that,  when  !ie  mentions  him,  he  docs  it  as  of  one  who  was  well  known  ?  The  mere 
n.>eution  of  his  name  in  tliis  manner  by  Ezcliiel,  proves  that  his  character  was  well  known 
to  those  fjr  whom  he  wrote.  Noah  and  Job  were  thus  known  by  the  ancient  records;  but  how 
■was  Daniel  thus  known?  He  is  nowhere  mentioned  in  the  ancient  writings  of  the  Hebrews. 
»nd  if  he  was  so  well  known  that  he  could  be  referred  to  in  the  same  way  as  Noah  and  Job,  it 
must  be  either  because  there  was  some  tradition  in  regard  to  him,  or  because  he  was  then  living, 
»nd  his  character  was  well  understood  by  those  for  whom  Ezekiel  wrote.     But  there  is  no 

jvidence  that  there  was  any  such  tradition,  and  no  probability  that  there  was;  and  the  con- 
clusion, then,  is  inevitable,  that  he  was  then  so  well  known  to  the  Hebrews  in  exile,  that  it  WM 
priiper  for  Ezekiel  to  mention  him  just  as  he  did  Noah  and  Job.  If  so,  this  furnishes  the 
highest  evidence  that  ho  actually  lived  in  th^  time  of  Ezekiel;  that  is,  in  the  time  when  thij 
Vook  purports  to  have  been  written. 


B.C.607.f  CHAPTER  1.  85 

§  2.   ANALYSIS  OF  THE  CnAPTER. 

This  chapter  is  entirely  histoi'ical,  tlio  prophetic  portions  of  the  booli  eommenc.ins  Tvith  Iha 
second  cliaptor.  The  nhject  of  this  chapter  seems  to  be  to  Ftiite  the  way  in  wliieli  Daniel,  wlio 
subsequently  acted  so  iuiportaut  a  part  in  I'abylon,  wa-s  raised  to  so  distinguished  favour  with 
the  kinj;  and  court.  It  was  remarkable  that  a  Jewish  captive,  and  a  younj;  man,  should  be  bo 
honoured;  that  he  should  be  admitted  as  one  of  tl  r  principal  counsellors  of  the  king,  and  that 
he  should  ultimately  become  the  prime-minister  of  the  realm;  and  there  was  a  propriety  that 
there  should  be  a  preliminary  statement  of  the  stops  of  this  extraordinary  promotion.  This 
chapter  contains  a  reconl  of  the  way  in  which  the  future  premier  and  prophet  was  introduced  to 
the  notice  of  the  reigning  monarch,  and  by  which  his  wonderful  genius  and  sagacity  were  dis- 
covered. It  is  a  chapter,  therefore,  that  may  be  full  of  interest  and  instruction  to  all,  and 
especially  to  young  men.  The  chapter  contains  the  record  of  the  following  points,  or  steps, 
which  led  to  the  promotion  of  Daniel : — 

I.  The  history  of  the  Jewish  captivity,  as  explanatory  of  the  reason  why  those  who  are  sub- 
sequently referred  to  were  in  Uabylon.  They  were  exiles,  having  been  conveyed  as  captives 
to  a  foreign  land,  vs.  1.  2. 

II.  The  purpose  of  the  king,  Nebuchadnezzar,  to  bring  forward  the  principal  talent  to  be 
found  among  the  Jewish  captives,  and  to  put  it  under  a  process  of  training,  that  it 
might  be  employed  at  the  court,  ys.  3,  4.  In  carrying  out  this  purpose,  a  confidential 
officer  of  tlie  court,  Ashpenaz,  was  directed  to  search  out  among  the  captives  the  most 
promising  youths,  whether  by  birth  or  talent,  and  to  put  them  under  a  process  of  train- 
ing, that  they  might  become  fully  instructed  in  the  science  of  the  Chaldeans.  AVhat 
wore  the  reasons  which  led  to  this  cannot  be  known  with  certainty.  They  may  have  been 
such  as  these :  (1.)  The  Chaldeans  had  devoted  themselves  to  science,  especially  to  those 
sciences  which  promised  any  information  respecting  future  events,  the  secrets  of  the 
unseen  world,  &c.  Hence  they  either  originated  or  adopted  the  science  of  astrology;  they 
practised  the  arts  of  magic;  they  studied  to  interpret  dreams;  and,  in  general,  they  made 
use  of  all  the  means  which  it  was  then  supposed  could  be  employed  to  unlock  the 
secrets  of  the  invisible  world,  and  to  disclose  the  future.  (2.)  They  could  not  have  been 
ignorant  of  the  fact,  that  the  Hebrews  claimed  to  have  communications  with  God.  They 
had  doubtless  heard  of  their  prophets,  and  of  their  being  able  to  foretell  what  was  to 
occur.  This  kind  of  knowledge  would  fall  in  with  the  objects  at  which  the  Chaldeans 
aimed,  and  if  they  could  avail  themselves  of  it,  it  would  enable  them  to  secure  what  they 
so  ardently  sought.  It  is  probable  that  they  considered  this  as  a  sort  of  permanent 
power  which  the  Hebrew  prophets  had,  and  supposed  that  at  all  times,  and  on  all  subjects, 
they  could  interpret  dreams,  and  solve  the  various  questions  about  which  their  own 
magicians  were  so  much  engaged.  It  is  not  to  be  presumed  that  they  had  any  very  accu- 
rate knowledge  on  the  exact  character  of  the  Hebrew  prophecies,  or  the  nature  of  the 
communication  which  the  prophets  had  with  God;  but  it  was  not  unnatural  for  them  to 
suppose  that  this  spirit  of  prophesy  or  divination  would  be  possessed  by  the  most  noble 
and  the  most  talented  of  the  land.  Hence  Ashpenaz  was  instructed  to  select  those  of  the 
royal  family,  and  those  in  whom  there  was  no  blemish,  and  who  were  handsome,  and  who 
were  distinguished  for  knowledge,  and  to  prepare  them,  by  a  suitable  course,  for  being  pre- 
sented to  the  king.  (3.)  It  may  have  been  the  purpose  of  the  Chaldean  monarch  to  bring 
forward  all  the  talent  of  the  realm,  whether  native  or  foreign,  to  be  employed  in  the  service 
of  the  government.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  there  was  any  jealousy  of  foreign 
talent,  or  any  reluctance  to  employ  it  in  any  proper  way,  in  promoting  the  interests  of 
the  kingdom.  As  the  Chaldean  monarch  had  now  in  his  possession  the  Hebrew  royal 
family,  and  all  the  principal  men  that  had  been  distinguished  in  Judea,  it  was  not  un- 
natural to  suppose  that  there  might  be  valuable  talent  among  them  of  which  he  might 
avail  himself,  and  which  would  add  to  the  splendour  of  his  own  court  and  cabinet.  It 
might  have  been  naturaHs^  supposed,  also,  that  it  would  tend  much  to  conciliate  the  cap- 
tives themselves,  and  repress  any  existing  impatience,  or  insubordination,  to  select  tho 
most  noble  and  the  most  gifted  of  them,  and  to  employ  them  in  the  service  of  the  go- 
vernment; and  in  any  questions  that  might  arise  between  the  government  and  the  captive 
nation,  it  would  be  an  advantage  for  the  government  to  be  able  to  employ  native-born 
Hebrews  in  making  known  the  wishes  and  purposes  of  tho  government.  It  was,  more- 
over, in  accordance  with  the  proud  spirit  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (see  ch.  iv.),  to  surround 
liimself  with  all  that  would  impart  splendour  to  his  own  reign. 

HI.  The  method  by  which  this  talent  was  to  be  brought  forward,  vs.  5-7.  Tliis  was  by  a 
course  of  living  in  the  manner  of  the  royal  household,  with  the  presumption  that  at  the 
end  of  three  years,  in  personal  appearance,  and  in  the  knowledge  of  the  language  of  the 
Chaldeans  (ver.  4),  they  would  be  prepared  to  appear  at  court,  and  to  be  emnloyed  in  the 
service  to  which  they  might  be  appointed. 

rv.  The  resoivition  of  Daniel  not  to  corrupt  himself  with  the  viands  which  had  been  appointed 
for  him  and  his  brethren,  ver.  8.  He  had  heretofore  been  strictly  temperate;  he  haa 
avoided  till  luxurious  living;  he  had  abstained  from  wine;  and,  though  now  having  all 
the  means  of  luxurious  indulgence  at  command,  and  unexpectedly  thrown  into  the  temp- 
tations of  a  splendid  Oriental  court,  he  resolved  to  adhere  steadfastly  to  his  principles. 

V.  Tho  apprehension  of  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  that  this  would  be  a  ground  of  offence  with 
his  master,  the  king,  and  that  he  would  himself  be  held  responsible,  vs.  9,  10.  This  was  a 
8 


86 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  60r, 


▼ery  naturaJ  apprehension,  as  the  co2imand  seems  to  have  been  positive,  and  as  an  Oriental 
monarch  was  entirely  despotic.  It  was  not  unreasonable  for  him  to  whom  this  office  waj 
entrusted,  to  suppose  that  a  failure  on  his  part  to  accomplish  what  he  had  been  directed 
to  do  would  be  followed  by  a  loss  of  place  or  life. 

yi.  The  experiment,  and  the  result,  vs.  11-17.  Daniel  asked  that  a  trial  might  be  made  of 
the  effects  of  temperance  in  preparing  him  and  his  companions  for  presentation  at  court. 
He  requested  that  they  might  be  permitted,  even  for  a  brief  time,  yet-fong  enough  to  make 
a  fair  experiment,  to  abstain  from  wine,  and  the  other  luxuries  of  the  royal  table,  and  that 
then  it  might  be  determined  whether  they  should  be  allowed  to  continue  the  experiment. 
The  result  was  as  he  had  anticipated.  At  the  end  of  ten  days,  on  a  fair  comparison  with 
those  who  had  indulged  in  luxurious  living,  the  benefit  of  their  course  was  apparent,  and 
they  were  permitted  to  continue  this  strict  abstinence  during  the  remainder  of  the  tlmo 
which  was  deemed  necessary  for  their  preparation  to  appear  at  court. 

VII.  The  presentation  at  court,  vs.  lS-21.  At  the  end  of  the  time  appointed  for  preparation, 
Daniel  and  his  selected  companions  were  brought  into  the  royal  presence,  and  met  with 
the  most  favourable  reception  which  could  have  been  hoped  for.  They  were  distinguisiaed, 
it  would  seem,  for  beauty  and  manly  vigour,  and  as  much  distinguished  for  wisdom  as  they 
were  for  the  beauty  and  healthfulness  of  their  bodily  appearance.  They  at  once  took  an 
honourable  statiou,  greatly  surpassing  in  true  wisdom  and  knowledge  those  at  the  court 
who  were  regarded  as  skilled  in  the  arts  of  divination  and  astrology.  These  years  of 
preparation  we  are  not  to  suppose  were  spent  in  merely  cultivating  the  beauty  of  their 
personal  appearance,  but  they  were  doubtless  employed,  under  all  the  advantages  of  instruc- 
tion wliich  could  be  afforded  them,  in  the  careful  cultivation  of  their  mental  powers,  and  in 
the  acquisition  of  all  the  knowledge  which  could  be  obtained  under  the  best  masters  at  the 
court  of  the  Chaldeans.    Comp.  ver.  4. 


1 


N  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of 
Johoiakim  kinar  of  Judah  came 


1.  In  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  Je- 
hoiaJcim  king  of  Judah  came  Nebuchad- 
nezzar king  of  Babylon  unto  Jerusalem. 
This  event  occurred,  according  to  Jahn, 
(History  of  the  Hebrew  Commonwealth), 
in  the  year  607  before  Christ,  and  in  the 
368th  year  after  the  Revolt  of  the  ten 
tribes.  According  to  Usher,  it  was  in  the 
369th  year  of  the  Revolt,  and  606  B,  C. 
The  computation  of  Usher  is  the  one 
generally  received,  but  the  difference  of  a 
year  in  the  reckoning  is  not  material. 
Comp.  Micha3lis,  Anmerkung,  zu  2  Kon. 
xxiv.  1.  Jehoiakim  was  a  son  of  Josiah, 
a  prince  who  was  distinguished  for  his 
piety,  2  Kings,  xxii.  2;  2  Chron.  xxxv. 
1-7.  After  the  death  of  Josiah,  the  peo- 
ple raised  to  the  throne  of  Judah  Je- 
hoahaz,  the  younger  son  of  Josiah,  proba- 
bly because  he  appeared  better  qualified  to 
reign  than  his  elder  brother.  2  Kings 
xxiii.  30:  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  1.  He  was  a 
wicked  prince,  and,  after  he  had  been  on 
the  throne  three  months,  he  was  removed 
by  Pharaoh-nechoh,  king  of  Egypt,  who 
returned  to  Jerusalem  from  the  conquest 
of  Phoenicia,  and  placed  his  elder  brother, 
Eliakim,  to  whom  he  gave  the  name  of 
Jehoiakim,  on  the  throne.  2  Kings  xxiii. 
34 ;  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  4.  Jehoahaz  was 
first  imprisoned  in  Riblah,  2  Kings,  xxiii. 
83,  and  was  afterwards  removed  to  Egypt. 
S  Chron.  xxxvi.  4.    Jehoiakim,  an  un- 


^  Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  Babylon 
unto  Jerusalem,  and  besieged  it. 

^  2  Kings  24.  1,  2;  2  Chron.  36.  6,  7. 


worthy  son  of  Josiah,  was,  in  reality,  as 
he  is  represented  by  Jeremiah,  one  of 
the  worst  kings  who  reigned  over  Judah, 
His  reign  continued  eleven  years,  and  as 
he  came  to  the  throne  B.  C.  611,  his 
reign  continued  to  the  year  600  B.  C.  In 
the  third  year  of  his  reign,  after  the  battle 
of  Megiddo,  Pharaoh-nechoh  undertook  a 
second  expedition  against  Nabopolassar, 
king  of  Babj'lon,  with  a  numerous  army, 
drawn  in  part  from  Western  Africa,  Libya, 
and  Ethiopia.  Jahn's  His.  Heb.  Com- 
monwealth, p.  134.  This  Nabopolassar, 
who  is  also  called  Nebuchadnezzar  I.,  was 
at  this  time,  as  Berosus  relates,  aged  and 
infirm.  He  therefore  gave  up  a  part  of 
his  army  to  his  son  Nebuchadnezzar,  who 
defeated  the  Egyptian  host  at  Carche- 
mish  (Circesium)  on  the  Euphrates,  and 
drove  Necho  out  of  Asia.  The  victorious 
prince  marched  directly  to  Jerusalem, 
which  was  then  under  the  sovereignty  of 
Egypt.  After  a  short  siege  Jehoiakim 
surrendered,  and  was  again  placed  on  the 
throne  by  the  Babylonian  prince.  Ne- 
buchadnezzar took  part  of  the  furniture 
of  the  temple  as  booty,  and  carried  back 
with  him  to  Babylon  several  young  men, 
the  sons  of  the  principal  Hebrew  nobles, 
among  whom  were  Daniel  and  his  three 
friends  referred  to  in  this  chapter.  It  la 
not  improbable  that  one  object  in  con- 
veying them  to  Babylon  waa  that  they 


B.  C.  606.] 


CHAPTER  I. 


m 


2  And  the  Lord  gave  Johoiakim 
king  of  Judah  into  his  hand,  with 


part  of  the  ressels  of  the  house  of 
God :  Avhich  he  carried  into  the  land 


might  be  hostages  for  the  submission  and 
good  order  of  the  Hebrews  in  their  own 
land.  It  is  at  this  time  that  the  Baby- 
lonian sovereignty  over  Judah  eommeuces, 
commonly  called  the  Babylonian  cap- 
tivity, which,  according  to  the  prophecy 
of  Jeremiah,  xxv.  l-H,  xxix.  10,  was  to 
continue  seventy  years.  In  Jer.  xxv.  1, 
ond  xlvi.  2,  it  is  said  that  this  was  in  the 
fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim.  In  the  passage 
before  us  it  is  said  that  it  was  the  third 
year.  This  diflference,  says  Jahn,  arises 
from  a  diflferent  mode  of  computation. 
"  Jehoiakim  came  to  the  throne  at  the 
end  of  the  year,  which  Jeremiah  reckons 
as  the  first  (and  such  a  mode  of  reckon- 
ing is  not  uncommon),  but  Daniel  neglect- 
ing the  incomplete  year,  numbers  one 
less."  For  a  more  full  and  complete  ex- 
amination of  the  objection  to  the  genuine- 
ness of  Daniel  from  this  passage,  I  would 
refer  to  Prof.  Stuart  on  Daniel,  Excursus, 
1.  pp.  19-30.  ^  And  besieged  it.  Jerusa- 
lem was  a  strongly  fortified  place,  and  it 
was  not  easy  to  take  it,  except  as  the  re- 
sult of  a  siege.  It  was,  perhaps,  never 
carried  by  direct  and  immediate  assault. 
Comp.  2  Kings  xxv.  1-3,  for  an  account 
of  a  siege  of  Jerusalem  a  second  time  by 
Nebuchadnezzar.  At  that  time  the  city 
was  besieged  about  a  year  and  a  half. 
How  long  the  siege  here  referred  to  con- 
tinued is  not  specified. 

2.  And  the  Lord  gave  Jehohiahim  hing 
of  Judah  into  his  hand.  Jehoiakim  was 
taken  captive,  and  it  would  seem  that 
there  was  an  intention  to  convey  him  to 
Babylon  (2  Chron.  xxxvi.  6),  but  that  for 
some  cause  he  was  not  removed  there, 
but  died  at  Jerusalem  (2  Kings  xxiv. 
5,  6),  though  he  was  not  honourably 
buried  there.  Jer.  xxii.  19,  xxxvi.  30. 
In  the  Second  Book  of  Chronicles  (xxxvi. 
6),  it  is  said  that  "  Nebuchadnezzar  king 
of  Babylon  came  up,  and  bound  Jehoia- 
kim in  fetters  to  take  him  to  Babylon." 
Jahn  supposes  that  an  error  has  crept 
into  the  text  in  the  Book  of  Chronicles, 
as  there  is  no  evidence  that  Jehoiakim 
was  taken  to  Babj'lon,  but  it  appears  from 
2  Kings  xxiv.  1,  2,  that  Jehoiakim  was 
continued  in  authority  at  Jerusalem  under 
Nebuchadnezzar  three  years,  and  then  re- 
belled against  him,  and  that  then  Nebu- 
chadnezzar sent  against  him  "  bands  of 
Jie  Chaldees,  and  bands  of  the  Syrians, 


and  bands  of  the  Moabites,  and  bands  of 
the  children  of  Ammon,  and  sent  them 
against  Judah  to  destroy  it."  There  la 
no  necessity  of  supposing  an  error  in  the 
text  in  the  account  in  the  Book  of  Chron- 
icles. It  is  probable  that  Jehoiakim  was 
taken,  and  that  the  intention  was  to  take 
him  to  Babylon,  according  to  the  account 
in  Chronicles,  but  that,  from  some  cause 
not  mentioned,  the  purpose  of  the  Chal- 
dean monarch  was  changed,  and  that  he 
was  placed  again  over  Judah,  under  Ne- 
buchadnezzar, according  to  the  account 
in  the  Book  of  Kings,  and  that  he  re- 
mained in  this  condition  for  three  years 
till  he  rebelled,  and  that  then  the  bands 
of  Chaldeans,  &c.,  were  sent  against 
him.  It  is  probable  that  at  this  time, 
perhaps  while  the  siege  was  going  on,  he 
died,  and  that  the  Chaldeans  dragged  his 
dead  body  out  of  the  gates  of  the  city, 
and  left  it  unburied,  as  Jeremiah  had 
predicted.  Jer.  xxii.  19,  xxxvi.  30.  ^  With 
part  of  the  vessels  of  the  house  of  God. 
2  Chron.  xxxvi.  7.  Another  portion  of 
the  vessels  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem 
had  been  taken  away  by  Nebuchadnezzar, 
in  the  time  of  Jehoiachin,  the  successor  of 
Jehoiakim.  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  10.  On  the 
third  invasion  of  Palestine,  the  same 
thing  had  been  repeated  on  a  more  ex- 
tensive scale.  2  Kings  xxiv.  13.  At  the 
fourth  and  final  invasion,  under  Zedekiah, 
when  the  temple  was  destroyed,  all  its 
treasures  were  carried  away.  2  Kings, 
xxv.  6-20.  A  part  of  these  treasures  were 
brought  back  under  Cyrus,  Ezra  L  7 ;  the 
rest  under  Darius,  Ezra  vi.  5.  Why  they 
were  not  all  taken  away  at  first  does  not 
appear,  but  perhaps  Nebuchadnezzar  did 
not  then  intend  wholly  to  overthrow  the 
Hebrew  nation,  but  meant  to  keep  them 
tributary  to  him  as  a  people.  The  temple 
was  not  at  that  time  destroyed,  but  pro- 
bably he  allowed  the  worship  of  Jehovah 
to  be  celebrated  there  still,  and  he  would 
naturally  leave  such  Tessels  as  were  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  keep  up  the  services  of 
public  worship  ^  Which  he  carried  into 
the  land  of  Shinar,  The  region  around 
Babylon.  The  exact  limits  of  this  country 
are  unknown,  but  it  probably  embraced  the 
region  known  as  Mesopotamia — the  coun- 
try between  the  rivers  Tigris  and  Eu- 
phrates. The  derivation  of  the  name 
Shinar  is  unknown.     It  occurs  only  ia 


is 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  606 


of  Shinar  to  the  house  of  his  god; 
and  he  brought  the  vessels  into  the 
treasure-house  of  his  god. 


Gen.  X.  10,  xi.  2,  xiv.  1,  9;  Josh.  vii.  21  ; 
Isa.  xi.  11 ;  Dan.  i.  2;  Zeeh.  v.  11.  *,]  To 
the  house  of  his  God.  To  the  temple  of 
Bel,  at  Babylon.  This  was  a  temple  of 
great  magnificence,  and  the  worship  of 
Bel  was  celebrated  there  with  great 
splendour.  For  a  description  of  this 
temple,  and  of  the  god  which  was  wor- 
shipped there,  see  Notes  on  Isa.  xlvi.  1. 
These  vessels  were  subsequently  brought 
out  at  the  command  of  Belshazzar,  at  his 
celebrated  feast,  and  employed  in  the  con- 
viviality and  revelry  of  that  occasion. 
See  Dan.  v.  3.  ^  And  he  hrotif/ht  the  ves- 
sels into  the  treasure-house  of  his  god.  It 
would  seem  from  this  that  the  vessels  had 
been  taken  to  the  temple  of  Bel,  or  Belus, 
in  Babylon,  not  to  be  used  in  the  worship 
of  the  idol,  but  to  be  laid  up  among  the 
valuable  treasures  there.  As  the  temples 
of  the  gods  were  sacred,  and  were  re- 
garded as  inviolable,  it  would  be  natural 
to  make  them  the  repository  of  valuable 
spoils  and  treasures.  Many  of  the  spoils 
of  the  Romans  were  suspended  around 
the  walls  of  the  temples  of  their  gods, 
particularly  in  the  Temple  of  Victory. 
Comp.  Eschenberg,  Manual  of  Class.  Lit. 
P.  iii.  ^  149,  150. 

3.  And  the  king  spake  unto  Ashpenaz 
the  master  of  his  eunuchs.  On  the  general 
reasons  which  may  have  influenced  the 
king  to  make  the  selection  of  the  youths 


3  T[  And  the  king  spake  unto  Ash 
penaz  the  master  of  his  eunuchs, 
that  he  should  bring  certain  of  the 


here  mentioned,  see  the  analysis  of  the 
chapter.  Of  Ashpenaz,  nothing  more  ia 
known  than  is  stated  here.  Eunuchs 
were  then,  as  they  are  now,  in  constant 
employ  in  the  harems  of  the  East,  and 
they  often  rose  to  great  infliuence  and 
power.  A  large  portion  of  the  slaves  em- 
ployed at  the  courts  in  the  East,  and  in 
the  houses  of  the  wealthy,  are  eunuchs. 
Comp.  Burckhardt's  Travels  in  Nubia, 
pp.  294,  295.  They  are  regarded  as  the 
guardians  of  the  female  virtue  of  the 
harem,  but  their  situation  gives  them 
great  influence,  and  they  often  rise  high 
in  the  favour  of  their  employers,  and 
often  become  the  principal  officers  of  the 
court.  "  The  chief  of  the  black  eunuchs 
is  yet,  at  the  court  of  the  Sultan,  which 
i-s  arranged  much  in  accordance  with  the 
ancient  court  of  Persia,  an  ofiicer  of  the 
highest  dignity.  He  is  called  Kislar-Aga, 
the  overseer  of  the  women,  and  is  the 
chief  of  the  black  eunuchs,  who  guard  the 
harem,  or  the  apartments  of  the  females. 
The  Kislar-Aga  enjoys,  through  his  situa- 
tion, a  vast  influence,  especially  in  regard  to 
the  ofiices  of  the  court,  the  principal  Agas 
deriving  their  situations  through  him." 
See  Jos.  von  Hammers  des  Osmanischen 
Reichs  Staatsverwalt,  Th.  i.  s.  71,  as 
quoted  in  Rosenmiiller's  Alte  und  neue 
Morgenland,  ii.  357,  348.  The  following 
cuts,  from  Assj'rian  marbles,  wiU  iUustrato 


tho  usual  appearance  of  these  officers. 
That  it  is  common  in  the  East  to  desire 
that  those  employed  in  public  service 
should  have  vigorous  bodies,  and  beauty 
of  form,  and  to  train  them  for  this,  will 
be  apparent  from  the  following  extract : 


"Curtius  says,  that  in  all  barbarous  or 
uncivilized  countries,  the  stateliness  of  tho 
body  is  held  in  great  veneration;  nor  do 
they  think  it  capable  of  great  services  or 
action  to  whom  nature  has  not  vouchsafed 
t-)  give  a  beautiful  form  and  aspect     It 


B.  C.  606.] 


CHAPTEE  I. 


children  *  of  Israel,  and  of  the  king's 
peed,  and  of  the  princes  ; 

»  Foretold,  2  Kings,  20. 17, 18 ;  Is.  39.  7. 


has  always  been  the  custom  of  eastern 
nations  to  choose  such  for  their  principal 
officers,  or  to  wait  on  princes  and  great 
personages.  Sir  Paul  Ricaut  observes, 
'That  the  youths  that  are  designed  for 
the  great  offices  of  the  Turkish  empire, 
must  be  of  admirable  features  and  looks, 
well-shaped  in  their  bodies,  and  without 
any  defect  of  nature ;  for  it  is  conceived 
that  a  corrupt  and  sordid  soul  can  scarcely 
inhabit  in  a  serene  and  ingenious  aspect; 
and  I  have  observed,  not  only  in  the 
seraglio,  but  also  in  the  courts  of  great 
men,  their,  personal  attendants  have  been 
of  comely  lusty  3'ouths,  well-habited,  de- 
porting themselves  with  singular  modesty 
and  respect  to  the  presence  of  their 
masters ;  so  that  when  a  Pascha  Aga 
Spahi  travels,  he  is  always  attended  with 
a  comely  equipage,  followed  by  flourish- 
ing youths,  well-clothed,  and  mounted,  in 
great  numbers.' " — Burder.  This  may 
serve  to  explain  the  reason  of  the  arrange- 
ment made  in  respect  to  these  Hebrew 
youths.  *l  That  he  should  brinfj  certain 
of  the  children  of  Israel.  Heb.  'of  the 
sons  of  Israel.'  Nothing  can  with  cer- 
tainty be  determined  respecting  their 
age  by  the  use  of  this  expression,  for  the 
phrase  means  merely  the  descendants  of 
Jacob,  or  Israel,  that  is,  Jews,  and  it 
would  be  applied  to  them  at  any  time  of 
life.  It  would  seem,  however,  from  sub- 
sequent statements,  that  those  who  were 
selected  were  young  men.  It  is  evident 
that  young  men  would  be  better  qualified 
for  the  object  contemplated — to  be  trailed 
in  the  language  and  the  sciences  of  the 
Chaldeans  (ver.  4) — than  those  who  were 
at  a  more  advanced  period  of  life.  *[  And 
of  the  king's  seed,  and  of  the  princes. 
That  the  most  illustrious,  and  the  most 
promising  of  them  were  to  be  selected; 
those  who  would  be  most  adapted  to  ac- 
complish the  object  which  he  had  in 
view.  Comp.  the  Analysis  of  the  chapter. 
It  is  probable  that  the  king  presumed, 
that  among  the  royal  youths  who  had 
been  made  captive,  there  would  be  found 
those  of  most  talent,  and  of  course  those 
best  qualified  to  impart  dignity  and 
honor  to  his  government,  as  well  as  those 
who  would  bo  most  likely  to  be  quali- 
5od  to  make  known  future  events  by 
the  interpretation  of  dreams,  and  by 
8* 


4  Children  in  -whom  was  no  blem- 
ish, but  well-favoured,  and  skilful  in 
all  wisdom,  and  cunning  in  knowl- 


the  prophetic  intimations  of  the  divine 
will. 

4.    Children  in  whom  was   no    blemish. 
The  word  rendered  children  in  this  place 

— ^''y?]  —  is  different  from  that  which  is 
rendered  cAi7rfre)i  in  ver.  3  —  2'J3.  That 
word  denotes  merely  that  they  were  sons, 
or  descendants,  of  Israel,  without  imply- 
ing anything  in  regard  to  their  age ;  the 
word  here  used  would  be  appropriate  only 
to  those  who  were  at  an  early  period  of 
life,  and  makes  it  certain  that  the  king 
meant  that  those  who  were  selected  should 
be  youths.  Comp.  Gen.  iv.  23,  where  the 
word  is  rendered  "a  young  man."  It  is 
sometimes,  indeed,  used  to  denote  a  son, 
without  reference   to   age,   and   is   then 

synonymous  with  ?5,  len,  a  son.  But  it 
properly  means  one  horn:  that  is,  recently 
born  ;  a  child.  Gen.  xxi.  8;  Ex.  i.  17,  ii. 
3  ;  and  then  one  in  early  life.  There  can 
be  no  doubt  that  the  monarch  meant  to 
designate _7/o!(f As.  So  the  Vulgate, pueros, 
and  the  Greek,  vcaviaxovi,  and  so  the 
Syriac.  AU  these  words  would  be  ap- 
plicable to  those  who  were  in  early  life, 
or  to  young  men.  Comp.  Intro,  to  Daniel, 
§  1.  The  word  blemish  refers  to  bodily 
defect  or  imperfection.  The  object  was 
to  select  those  who  were  most  perfect  in 
form,  perhaps  partly  because  it  was  sup- 
posed that  beautiful  youth  would  most 
grace  the  court,  and  partly  because  it 
was  supposed  that  such  would  be  likely 
to  have  the  brightest  intellectual  endow- 
ments. It  was  regarded  as  essential  to 
personal  beauty  to  be  without  blemish. 
2  Sam.  xiv.  25 :  "But  in  all  Israel  there 
was  none  to  be  so  much  praised  as  Absa- 
lom for  beauty ;  from  the  sole  of  his  feet, 
even  to  the  crown  of  his  head  there  was 
no  blemish  in  him."  Cant.  iv.  7  :  "  Thou 
art  all  fair,  my  love ;  there  is  no  spot  in 
thee."  The  word  is  sometimes  used  in  a 
moral  sense,  to  denote  corruption  of 
heart  or  life  (Deut.  xxxii.  5 ;  Job  xi.  15, 
xxxi.  7),  but  that  is  not  the  meaning 
here.  ^  But  well-favoured.  Heb.  'good 
of  appearance  ;'  that  is,  beautiful.  ^  And 
skilful  in  all  wisdom.  Intelligent,  wise, 
that  is,  in  all  that  was  esteemed  wise  in 
their  own  country.  The  object  was,  to 
brins  forward  the  most  talented  and  in 


m 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  6.06 


edge,  and  understanding  science,  1  whom  they  might  teach  the  learn* 
and  such  as  had  ability  in  them  to  ing  and  the  tonciue  of  the  Clial- 
Btand    in    the    king's   palace,    and    deans. 


telligent,  as  well  as  the  most  beautiful, 
among  the  Hebrew  captives.  ^  And  citn- 
ning  in  all  knoicledfje.  In  all  that  could 
be  known.     The  distinction  between  the 

■word  here  rendered  hnowledge  —  njl  — 
and  the  word  rendered  science  —  V^n  —  is 
not  apparent.  Both  come  from  the  word 
yi;,  to  know,  and  would  be  applicable 
to  any  kind  of  knowledge.  The  word 
rendered  cunning  is  also  derived  from  the 
same  root,  and  means  knowing,  or  skilled 
in.  We  more  commonly  apply  the  word 
to  a  particular  kind  of  knowledge,  mean- 
ing artful,  shrewd,  astute,  sly,  crafty,  de- 
signing. But  this  was  not  the  meaning 
of  the  word  when  the  translation  of  the 
Bible  was  made,  and  it  is  not  employed 
in  that  sense  in  the  Scriptures.  It  is 
always  used  in  a  good  sense,  meaning 
intelligent,  skilful,  experienced,  well-in- 
structed. Comp.  Gen.  xxv.  27;  Ex.  xxvi. 
1,  xxviii.  15,  xxxviii.  23;  1  Sam.  xvi.  16; 
1  Chron.  xxv.  7  ;  Ps.  cxxxvii.  5  ;  Isa.  iii.  3. 
^  And  rtndcrsfanding  science.  That  is,  the 
sciences  which  prevailed  among  the  He- 
brews. They  were  not  a  nation  dis- 
tinguished for  science,  in  the  sense  in 
which  that  term  is  now  commonly  un- 
derstood— embracing  astronomy,  chemis- 
try, geology,  mathematics,  electricity,  &c., 
but  their  science  extended  chiefly  to  mu- 
sic, architecture,  natural  history,  agricul- 
ture, morals,  theology,  war,  and  the 
knowledge  of  future  events;  in  all  which 
they  occupied  an  honourable  distinction 
among  the  nations.  In  many  of  these 
respects  they  were,  doubtless,  far  in 
advance  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  it  was 
probably  the  purpose  of  the  Chaldean 
monarch  to  avail  himself  of  what  they 
knew.  *l^  And  such  as  had  ahility  in  them 
to  stand  in  the  king's  palace.     Heb.  '  had 

strength '  —  n  ^  •  Properly  meaning,  who 
had  strength  of  body  for  the  service 
which  would  be  required  of  them  in  at- 
tending on  the  court.  "A  firm  consti- 
tution of  body  is  required  for  those 
protracted  services  of  standing  in  the 
hall   of  the   royal   presence." —  Grotius. 

The  word  jpa^acc  here  —  ^?''D  —  is  com- 
monly used  to  denote  the  temple.  2  Kings 
XxiT.  13;   2   Chron.  iii.  17 ;   Jer.  1.  28; 


Hag.  ii.  15.  Its  proper  and  primitive  sig. 
nification,  however,  is  a  large  and  magnifi- 
cent building — a  palace — and  it  was  given 
to  the  temple  as  the  palace  of  Jehovah,  the 
abode  where  he  dwelt  as  king  of  his 
people.  ^  ^?!(i  lohom  they  might  teach. 
That  they  might  be  better  qualified  for 
the  duties  to  which  they  might  be  called. 
The  purpose  was,  doubtless  (see  Analysis), 
to  bring  forward  their  talent,  that  it  might 
contribute  to  the  splendour  of  the  Chal- 
dean court;  but  as  they  were,  doubtless, 
ignorant,  to  a  great  extent,  of  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Chaldeans,  and  as  there 
were  sciences  in  which  the  Chaldeans 
were  supposed  to  excel,  it  seemed  de- 
sirable that  they  should  have  all  the 
advantage  which  could  be  derived  from  a 
careful  training  under  the  best  masters. 

^  The  learning.  ipD.  Literally,  wri- 
ting. Isa.  xxis.  11,  12.  Gesenius  sup- 
poses that  this  means  the  writing  of  the 
Chaldeans  ;  or  that  they  might  be  able  to 
read  the  language  of  the  Chaldeans.  But 
it,  doubtless,  included  the  knoioledge  of 
what  was  written,  as  well  as  the  ability  to 
read  what  was  written ;  that  is,  the  pur- 
pose was  to  instruct  them  in  the  sciences 
which  were  understood  among  the  Chal- 
deans. They  were  distinguished  chiefly 
for  such  sciences  as  these:  (1.)  Astrono- 
my. This  science  is  commonly  supposed 
to  have  had  its  origin  on  the  plains  of 
Babylon,  and  it  was  early  carried  there 
to  as  high  a  degree  of  perfection  as  it 
attained  in  any  of  the  ancient  nations. 
Their  mild  climate,  and  their  employ- 
ments as  shepherds,  leading  them  to  pass 
much  of  their  time  at  night  under  the 
open  heavens,  gave  them  the  opportunity 
of  observing  the  stars,  and  they  amused 
themselves  in  marking  their  positions 
and  their  changes,  and  in  mapping  out 
the  heavens  in  a  variety  of  fanciful 
figures,  now  called  constellations.  (2.)  As- 
trology. This  was  at  first  a  branch  of 
astronomy,  or  was  almost  identical  with 
it,  for  the  stars  were  studied  principally 
to  endeavour  to  ascertain  what  influence 
they  exerted  over  the  fates  of  men,  and 
especially  what  might  be  predicted  from 
their  position  on  the  birth  of  an  indi- 
vidual, as  to  his  future  life.  Astrology 
was  then  deemed  a  science  whose  lawi 


B.  C.  606.] 


CHAPTER  I. 


91 


were  to  be  ascertained  in  the  same  way 
as  the  laws  of  any  other  science ;  and  the 
world  has  been  slow  to  disabuse  itself  of 
the  notion  that  the  stars  exert  an  influence 
over  the  fates  of  men.  Even  Lord  Bacon 
be'ii  that  it  was  a  science  to  be  "re- 
forn.ed,"  not  wholly  rejected.  (3.)  Ma- 
gic; soothsaying:  divination  ;  or  whatever 
would  contribute  to  lay  open  the  future, 
or  disclose  the  secrets  of  the  invisible 
world.  Hence  they  applied  themselves 
to  the  interpretation  of  dreams  ;  they  made 
use  of  magical  arts,  probably  employing, 
as  magicians  do,  some  of  the  ascertained 
results  of  science  in  producing  optical 
illusions,  impressing  the  vulgar  with  the 
belief  that  they  were  familiar  with  the 
secrets  of  the  invisible  world ;  and  hence 
the  name  Chaldean  and  matjician  became 
almost  synonymous  terms.  Ch.  ii.  2,  iv. 
7,  V.  7.  (4.)  It  is  not  improbable  that 
they  had  made  advances  in  other  sciences, 
but  of  this  we  have  little  knowledge. 
They  knew  little  of  the  true  laws  of 
astronomy,  geology,  chemistry,  electri- 
city, mathematics ;  and  in  these,  and  in 
kindred  departments  of  science,  they  may 
be  supposed  to  have  been  almost  wholly 
ignorant.  ^  And  the  tomjue  of  the  Chal- 
deans. In  regard  to  the  Chaldeans,  see 
Notes  on  Job  i.  17,  and  Isa.  xxiii.  13. 
The  kingdom  of  Babylon  was  composed 
mainly  of  Chaldeans,  and  that  kingdom 
was  called  "  the  realm  of  the  Chaldeans." 
Dan.  ix.  1.  Of  that  realm,  or  kingdom, 
Babylon  was  the  capital.  The  origin  of  the 
Chaldeans  has  been  a  subject  of  great 
perplexity,  on  which  there  is  still  a  con- 
siderable variety  of  opinions.  According 
to  Heeren  they  came  from  the  North ;  by 
Gesenius  they  are  supposed  to  have  come 
from  the  mountains  of  Kurdistan  ;  and 
by  Micbaslis  from  the  Steppes  of  Scythia. 
They  seem  to  have  been  an  extended 
race,  and  probably  occupied  the  whole  of 
the  region  adjacent  to  what  became  Bab- 
ylonia. Heeren  expresses  his  opinion  as 
to  their  origin  in  the  following  language : 
"It  cannot  be  doubted,  that,  at  some 
remote  period,  antecedent  to  the  com- 
mencement of  historical  records,  one 
viightij  race  possessed  these  vast  plains, 
"arying  in  character  according  to  the 
country  which  they  inhabited;  in  the 
deserts  of  Arabia,  pursuing  a  nomad  life  ; 
in  Syria,  applying  themselves  to  agricul- 
ture, and  taking  up  settled  abodes ;  in 
Babylonia,  erecting  the  most  magnificent 
cities  of  ancient  times;  and  in  Phoenecia, 


opening  the  earliest  ports,  and  construct- 
ing fleets,  which  secured  to  them  the 
commerce  of  the  knowi?  world."  There 
exists  at  the  present  time,  in  the  vicinity 
of  the  Bahreia  Islands,  and  along  the 
Persian  gulf,  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
the  Astan  river,  an  Arab  tribe,  of  the 
name  of  the  Beni  Khaled,  who  are  pro- 
bably the  same  people  as  the  Gens  Chaldei 
of  Pliny,  and  doubtless  the  descendants 
of  the  ancient  race  of  the  Chaldeans.  On 
the  question  when  they  became  a  king- 
dom, or  realm,  making  Babylon  their 
capital,  see  Notes  on  Isa.  xxiii.  13.  Com- 
pare, for  an  interesting  discussion  of  the 
subject,  Forster's  Historical  Geography 
of  Arabia,  vol.  i.  pp.  49-56.  The  lan- 
guage of  the  Chaldeans,  in  which  a  con- 
siderable part  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  is 
written  (see  the  Intro,  g  4,  III.),  differed 
from  the  Hebrew,  though  it  was  a  branch 
of  the  same  Aramasn  family  of  languages. 
It  was,  indeed,  very  closely  allied  to  the 
Hebrew,  but  was  so  different  that  those 
who  were  acquainted  with  only  one  of  the 
two  languages  could  not  understand  the 
other.  Comp.  Neh.  viii.  8.  Both  were 
the  offspring  of  the  original  Shemitish 
language.  This  original  language  may  be 
properly  reduced  to  three  great  branches : 
(1.)  The  Aramaean,  which  prevailed  in 
Syria,  Babylonia,  and  Mesopotamia ;  and 
which  may,  therefore,  be  divided  into  the 
Syriac  or  West-Aramten,  and  the  Chaldee 
or  East-Aramsen,  called  after  the  Babylon- 
ish Aramsen.  (2.)  The  Hebrew,  with  which 
the  fragments  of  the  Phoenician  coincide. 
(3.)  The  Arabic,  under  which  belongs  the 
Ethiopia  as  a  dialect.  The  Aramaen, 
which,  after  the  return  from  the  Bab- 
ylonish captivity,  was  introduced  into 
Palestine,  and  which  prevailed  in  the 
time  of  the  Saviour,  is  commonly  called 
the  Syro-Chaldaic,  because  it  was  a  mix- 
ture of  the  Eastern  and  Western  dialects. 
The  Chaldee,  or  East  Aramain,  and  the 
Hebrew,  had,  in  general,  the  same  stock  of 
original  words,  but  they  differed  in  several 
respects,  such  as  the  following :  (a)  Many 
words  of  the  old  primitive  language  which 
had  remained  in  one  dialect  had  been 
lost  in  the  other.  (6)  The  same  word  was 
current  in  both  dialects,  but  in  different 
significations,  because  in  the  one  it  re- 
tained the  primitive  signification,  while 
in  the  other  it  had  acquired  a  different 
meaning,  (c)  The  Babylonian  dialect  had 
borrowed  expressions  from  the  Northern 
Chaldeans,  who  had  made  various  irrup- 


92 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  Goa 


5  And  the  kin<i;  appointed  them 
a  daily  provision  of  the  king's  meat, 
and  of  tiie  wine  »  which  he  drank: 

*  Of  his  drink. 


tions  intc  the  country.  These  expressions 
were  foreign  to  the  Shemitish  dialects, 
and  belonged  to  the  Japhetian  language, 
which  prevailed  among  the  Armenians, 
the  Medes,  the  Persians,  and  the  Chal- 
deans, who  were  probably  related  to 
these.  Traces  of  these  foreign  words  are 
found  in  the  names  of  the  officers  of  state, 
and  in  expressions  having  reference  to  the 
government,  (rf)  The  Babylonian  pro- 
nunciation was  more  easy  and  more 
sonorous  than  the  Hebrew.  It  exchanged 
the  frequent  sibilants  of  the  Hebrew,  and 
the  other  consonants  which  were  hard  to 
pronounce,  for  others  which  were  less  dif- 
ficult; it  dropped  the  long  vowels  which 
were  not  essential  to  the  forms  of  words ; 
it  preferred  the  more  sonorous  A  to  the 
long  0,  and  assumed  at  the  end  of  nouns, 
in  order  to  lighten  the  pronunciation,  a 
prolonged  auxiliary  vowel  (the  so  called 
emphatic  N);  it  admitted  contractions  in 
pronouncing  many  words,  and  must  have 
been,  as  the  language  of  common  life,  far 
better  adapted  to  the  sluggish  Orientals 
than  the  harsher  Hebrew.  See  an  article 
"  On  the  Prevalence  of  the  Aramasan  Lan- 
guage in  Palestine  in  the  age  of  Christ 
and  the  Apostles,"  by  Henry  F.  Pfann- 
kuche,  in  the  Biblical  Repository,  vol.  i. 
pp.  318,  .319.  On  this  verse,  also,  comp. 
Notes  on  Isa.  xxxix.  7. 

5.  And  the  king  appointed  them.  Cal- 
vin supposes  that  this  arrangement  was 
resorted  to  in  order  to  render  them  ef- 
feminate, and,  bj'  a  course  of  luxurious 
living,  to  induce  them  gradually  to  forget 
their  own  country,  and  that  with  the 
same  view  their  names  were  changed. 
But  there  is  no  evidence  that  this  was  the 
object.  The  purpose  was  manifestly  to 
train  them  in  the  manner  in  which  it  was 
supposed  they  would  be  best  fitted,  in 
bodily  health,  in  personal  beauty,  and  in 
intellectual  attainments,  to  appear  at 
court,  and  it  was  presumed  that  the  best 
stj'le  of  living  which  the  realm  furnished 
would  conduce  to  this  end.  That  the 
design  was  not  to  make  them  efieminate, 
is  apparent  from  vcr.  15.  5f  -^  daily  pro- 
vision. Heb.  'The  thing  of  a  day  in  his 
day ;'  that  is,  he  assigned  to  them  each 
day  a  portion  of  what  had  been  prepared 
for  the  rojjal  meal.     It  was  not  a  per- 


so  nourishing  them  three  years, 
that  at  the  end  thereof  they  might 
stand  before  the  king. 


manent  provision,  but  one  which  was 
made   each    day.      The    word    rendered 

"provision"  —  ns — path,  means  a  hit, 
crumb,  morsel.  Gen.  xviii.  5;  Judges 
xix.  5;  Ps.  cxlvii.  17.  *\  Of  the  king's 
meat.  The  word  meat  here  means  food, 
as  it  does  uniformly  in  the  Bible,  the  old 
English  word  having  this  signification 
when  the  translation  was  made,  and  not 
being  limited  then,  as  it  is  now,  to  animal 

food.  The  word  in  the  original  —  J?  — 
hag,  is  of  Persian  origin,  meaning  foodi 
The  two  words  are  frequently  compound- 
ed—ja^S —  path-lag  (Dan.  i.  5,  8,  13, 
15,  16,  xi.  26),  and  the  compound  means 
delicate  food,  dainties  ;  literally,  '  food  of 
the  father;'  i.  e.  the  king;  or,  according 
to  Lorsbach,  in  Archiv  f.  Morgenl.  Litt. 
II.  313,  food  for  idols,  or  the  gods ; — in 
either  case  denoting  delicate  food ;  lux- 
urious living.  Gesenius,  ieo-.  ^  And  of 
the  icine  tchich  he  drank.  Marg.,  of  his 
drink.  Such  wine  as  the  king  was  ac- 
customed to  drink.  It  may  be  presumed 
that  this  was  the  best  kind  of  wine.  From 
anything  that  appears,  this  was  furnished 
to  them  in  abundance ;  and  with  the 
leisure  which  they  had,  they  could  hardly 
be  thrown  into  stronger  temptation  tu 
excessive  indulgence.  ^  So  jwurishing 
them  three  years.  As  long  as  was  sup- 
posed to  be  necessary  in  order  to  develop 
their  physical  beauty  and  strength,  and 
to  make  them  well  acquainted  with  the 
language  and  learning  of  the  Chaldeans. 
The  object  was  to  prepare  them  to  give 
as  much  dignity  and  ornament  to  the 
court  as  possible.  ^  That  at  the  end 
thereof  they  might  stand  hcfore  the  king. 
Notes,  ver.  4.  On  the  arrangements  made 
to  bring  forward  these  youths,  the  editor 
of  the  Pictorial  Bible  makes  the  follow- 
ing remarks,  showing  the  correspondence 
between  these  arrangements  and  what 
usually  occurs  in  the  East :  "  There  is  not 
a  single  intimation  which  may  not  be 
illustrated  from  the  customs  of  the  Turk- 
ish seraglio,  till  some  alterations  were 
made  in  this,  as  in  other  matters,  by  the 
present  Sultan  [Mahmoud].  The  pages 
of  the  seraglio,  and  officers  of  the  court, 
as  well  Rs  the  greater  part  of  the  public 


B.  C.  606.] 


CHAPTER   I. 


93 


6  Now  amon;:;  these  ■were  of  the    children  of  Judah,    Daniel,  Ilana- 

niah,  Mishael,  and  Azariah  ; 


functionaries  and  governors  of  provinces, 
were  originally  Christian  boys,  taken  cap- 
tive in  war,  or  bought  or  stolen  in  time 
of  peace.  The  finest  and  most  capable 
of  these  were  sent  to  the  palace,  and  if 
accepted,  were  placed  under  the  charge  of 
the  chief  of  the  white  eunuchs.  The  lads 
did  not  themselves  become  eunuchs ;  which 
we  notice  because  it  has  been  erroneously 
inferred,  that  Daniel  and  the  other  He- 
brew youths  must  have  been  made  eunuchs, 
because  they  were  committed  to  the  care 
of  the  chief  eunuch.  The  accepted  lads 
were  brought  up  in  the  religion  of  their 
masters;  and  there  were  schools  in  the 
palace  where  they  received  such  com- 
plete instruction  in  Turkish  learning  and 
science  as  it  was  the  lot  of  few  others  to 
obtain.  Among  their  accomplishments 
we  find  it  mentioned,  that  the  greatest 
pains  were  taken  to  teach  them  to  speak 
the  Turkish  language  (a  foreign  one  to 
them)  with  the  greatest  purity,  as  spoken 
at  court.  Compare  this  with,  '  Teach 
them  the  learning  and  tongue  of  the  Chal- 
deans.' The  lads  were  clothed  very 
neatly,  and  well,  but  temperately,  dieted. 
They  slept  in  large  chambers,  where 
there  were  rows  of  beds.  Every  one  slept 
separately ;  and  between  every  third  or 
fourth  bed  lay  a  white  eunuch,  who  served 
as  a  sort  of  guard,  and  was  bound  to  keep 
a  careful  eye  upon  the  lads  near  him,  and 
report  his  observations  to  his  superior. 
When  any  one  of  them  arrived  at  a  proper 
age  they  were  instructed  in  military  ex- 
ercises, and  paius  taken  to  make  them 
active,  robust,  and  brave.  Every  one, 
also,  according  to  the  custom  of  the 
country,  was  taught  some  mechanical  or 
liberal  art,  to  serve  him  as  a  resource  in 
adversity.  AVhen  their  education  was 
completed  in  all  its  branches,  those  who 
had  displayed  the  most  capacity  and 
valour,  were  employed  about  the  person 
of  the  king,  and  the  rest  given  to  the 
service  of  the  treasury,  and  the  other 
offices  of  the  extensive  establishment  to 
which  they  belonged.  In  due  time  the 
more  talented  or  successful  j'oung  men  got 
promoted  to  the  various  high  court  offices 
which  give  them  access  to  the  private 
apartments  of  the  seraglio,  so  that  they 
at  almost  any  time  could  see  and  speak  to 
their  great  master.  This  advantage  soon 
paved  the  way  for  their  promotion  to  the 


government  of  provinces  and  to  military 
commands ;  and  it  has  often  happened 
that  favourite  court  officers  have  stepped 
at  once  into  the  post  of  grand  vizier,  or 
chief  minister,  and  other  high  otiicea 
of  state,  without  having  previously  been 
abroad  in  the  world  as  pashas  and  mili- 
tary commanders.  How  well  this  agrees 
to  and  illustrates  the  usage  of  the  Bab- 
ylonian court,  will  clearly  appear  to  the 
reader  without  particular  indication.  See 
Habesci's  '  Ottoman  Empire ;'  Tavernier's 
'Relation  de  I'lnterieur  du  Serail  du 
Grand  Seigneur.' " 

6.  ]\''ow  among  these  n-cre  of  the  children 
of  Judah.  That  is,  these  were  a  part  of 
those  who  were  selected.  They  are  men- 
tioned because  they  became  so  prominent 
in  the  transactions  which  are  subsequent- 
ly recorded  in  this  book,  and  because 
they  evinced  such  extraordinary  virtue 
in  the  development  of  the  principles  in 
which  they  had  been  trained,  and  in  the 
remarkable  trials  through  which  they  were 
called  to  pass.  It  does  not  appear  that 
they  are  mentioned  here  particularly  on 
account  of  any  distinction  of  birth,  or 
rank ;  for  though  they  were  among  the 
noble  and  promising  youth  of  the  land, 
yet  it  is  clear  that  others  of  the  same 
rank  and  promise  also  were  selected. 
Ver.  3.  Tlie  phrase  "  the  children  of 
Judah"  is  only  another  term  to  denoto 
that  they  were  Hebrews.  They  belonged 
to  the  tribe,   or  the  kingdom  of  Judah. 

^  Daniel.  This  name  —  ■<<''?'}  —  means 
properly  y»r/(jre  of  God;  that  is,  one  who 
acts  as  judge  in  the  name  of  God.  Why 
this  name  was  given  to  him  is  not  known. 
We  cannot,  however,  fail  to  be  struck  with 
its  appropriateness,  as  the  events  of  his 
life  showed.  Nor  is  it  known  whether  he 
belonged  to  the  royal  fiimily,  or  to  the 
nobles  of  the  land,  but  as  the  selection 
was  made  from  that  class  it  is  probable. 
Those  who  were  at  lirst  carried  into  cap- 
tivity were  selected  exclusively  from  the 
more  elevated  classes  of  society,  and 
there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that 
Daniel  belonged  to  a  family  of  rank  and 
consequence.  The  Jews  say  that  ho  was 
of  the  royal  family,  and  was  descended 
from  Hezekiah,  and  cite  his  history  in 
confirmation  of  the  prophecy  addressed 
by  Isaiah  to  that  monarch,  ''  Of  thy  soni 


u 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  6oa 


7  Unto  whom  the  prince  of  the 
eunuchs  gave  names :  for  he  gave 
unto  Daniel  ihe  name  of  =■  Belteshaz- 

=■  c.  4.  8,  5. 12. 


zar,  and  to  Hananiah,  of  Shadrachj 
and  to  Mishael,  of  Meshach  ;  and  to 
Azariah,  of  Abed-nego. 


■which  shall  issue  from  thee,  -srhich  thou 
shall  beget,  shall  they  take  awaj' ;  and 
they  shall  bo  eunuchs  in  the  palace  of 
the  king  of  Babylon."  Isa.  xxxix.  7. 
Comp.  Intro,  g  1.  ^  Hananiah,  Ilishael, 
and  Azariah.  Of  the  rank,  and  early 
history  of  these  young  men,  nothing  is 
known.  They  became  celebrated  for  their 
refusal  to  worship  the  golden  image  set 
up  by  Nebuchadnezzar.     Ch.  iii.  12.  seq. 

7.  Unto  ichum  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs 
gave  names.  This  practice  is  common  in 
Oriental  courts.  "  The  captive  youths 
referred  to  in  the  Notes  on  ver.  5,  in  the 
Turkish  court  also  receive  new  names, 
that  is,  Mohammedan  names,  their  former 
names  being  Christian."  Pict.  Bible.  It 
is  possible  that  this  changing  of  their 
names  may  have  been  designed  to  make 
them  forget  their  countrj"^,  and  their  re- 
ligion, and  to  lead  th^m  more  entirely  to 
identify  themselves  with  the  people  in 
whose  service  they  are  now  to  be  em- 
ployed, though  nothing  of  this  is  inti- 
mated in  the  hi.story.  Such  a  change,  it 
is  easy  to  conceive,  might  do  much  to 
make  them  feel  that  they  were  identified 
with  the  people  among  whom  they  were 
adopted,  and  to  make  them  forget  the 
customs  and  opinions  of  their  own  coun- 
try. It  is  a  circumstance  which  maj'  give 
some  additional  probability  to  this  sup- 
position, that  it  is  quite  a  common  thing 
now  at  missionary  stations  to  give  new 
names  to  the  children  who  are  taken  into 
the  boarding-schools,  and  especially  the 
names  of  the  Christian  benefactors  at 
whoso  expense  they  are  supported.  Comp. 
also  Gen.  xli.  45.  Another  reason,  of  the 
same  general  character,  for  this  change 
of  names  may  have  been,  that  the  name 
of  tho  true  God  constituted  a  part  of 
their  own  names,  and  that  thus  they 
were  constantly  reminded  of  him  and  his 
worship.  In  the  new  names  given  them, 
the  appellation  of  some  of  the  idols  wor- 
shipped in  Babylon  was  incorporated,  and 
this  might  serve  as  remembrancers  of  the 
divii..  ties  to  whose  service  it  was  doubt- 
less the  intention  to  win  them.  *[[  For  he 
gave  unto  Daniel  the  name  Belteshazzar. 
The  name  Belteshazzar  —  nxxK'ipS?  —  is 
jompoiinded  of  two  words,  and   means, 


according  to  Gesenius,  Bel's  prince  ,  that 
is,  he  whom  Bel  favours.  Bel  was  the 
principal  divinity  worshipped  at  Babylon  . 
(Notes,  Isa.  xlvi.  1),  and  this  name  would, 
therefore,  be  likely  to  impress  the  youth- 
ful Daniel  with  the  idea  that  he  was  a 
favourite  of  this  divinity,  and  to  attract 
him  to  his  service.  It  was  a  flattering 
distinction  that  he  was  one  of  the  favour- 
ites of  the  principal  god  worshipped  in 
Babylon,  and  this  was  not  improbably 
designed  to  turn  his  attention  from  the 
God  whose  name  had  been  incorporated 
in  his  own.  The  giving  of  this  name 
seemed  to  imply,  in  the  apprehension  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  that  the  spirit  of  tho 
gods  was  in  him  on  whom  it  was  conferred. 
See  ch.  iv.  8,  9.  ^  And  to  Hananiah, 
of  Shadrach.      The   name   Hananiah  — 

l^JJ^n  —  means,  "  AVhom  Jehovah  hag 
graciously  given,"  and  is  the  same  with 
Ananias  (Gr.,  Avavia;),  and  would  serve 
to  remind  its  possessor  of  the  name  of 
Jehovah,  and  of  his  mercy.     The  name 

Shadrach  —  IIT-'  —  according  to  Lors- 
bach,  means  young  friend  of  the  Icing  ;  ac- 
cording to  Bohlen,  it  means  rejoicing  in  the 
tcay,  and  this  last  signification  is  the  one 
which  Gesenius  prefers.  In  either  signifi- 
cation it  would  contribute  to  aforgetfulness 
of  the  interesting  signifieanc}' of  the  former 
name,  and  tend  to  obliterate  the  remem- 
brance of  the  early  training  in  the  ser- 
vice of  Jehovah.     ^  And  to  Ilishael,  of 

Ifeshaeh.  The  name  Mishael —  -iJf'^^O 
—  means  who  is  what  God  is? — from 
"■p,  who,  5?,  what,  and  Sf? ,  God.    It  would 

thus  be  a  remembrance  of  the  greatness 
of  God;  of  his  supremacy  over  all  his 
creatures,  and  of  his  incomparable  ex- 
altation over  the  universe.  The  significa- 
tion of  the  name  Meshach —  IP'^P  —  ia 
less  known.  The  Persian  word  means 
ovicula,  a  little  sheep  (Gesenius),  but 
why  this  name  was  given  we  are  not 
informed.  Might  it  have  been  on  ac- 
count of  his  beaut}',  his  gentleness,  his 
lamb-like  disposition  ?  If  so,  nothing 
perhaps  would  be  better  fitted  to  turn 
away  the  tlioughts  from  the  Great  God, 


B.  C.  GOG.] 


CHAPTER   I. 


% 


8  T[  But  Daniel  purposed   in    his 
heart  that  he  atouUI  not  defile  him- 
self -with  the  portion  ^  of  the  king's 
»  Dent.  32.  GS ;  Eze.  4.  13;  Kos.  9. 3. 


and  his  service,  to  himself.  ^  And  to 
Azariah,  of  Abcd^iier/o.   Tho  name  Azariah 

—  ^511?  —  mcanS;  tcJiom  JcJwvah  hcljjs, 

from  "^l}}  to  help,  and  ■'^J,  the  same  as 
Jehovah.  This  name,  therefore,  had  a 
striking  significancy,  and  would  bo  a  con- 
stant remembrancer  of  the  true  God,  and 
of  the  value  of  his  favour  and  protection. 

The  name  Abed-ner/o  —  1-1  ^  1 3  V — means, 
a  servant  of  Nego,  or  perhaps  of  Nelo  — 
"1 2  J ,  This  word  {Neho),  among  the  Chal- 
deans, probably  denoted  tho  planet  Mer- 
cury. This  planet  vras  worshipped  by 
them,  and  by  tho  Arabs,  as  the  celestial 
scribe,  or  writer.  See  Notes  on  Isa. 
xlvi.  1.  The  divine  worship  paid  to  this 
planet  by  the  Chaldeans  is  attested,  says 
Ge.<;enius,  by  the  many  compound  proper 
names  of  which  this  name  forms  a  part  ; 
as  Nebuchadnezzar,  Nebushasban,  and 
others  mentioned  in  classic  writers ;  as 
Nabonedus,  Nabonassar,  Nabonabus,  ifec. 
This  change  of  name,  therefore,  was  de- 
signed to  denote  a  consecration  to  the 
service  of  this  idol-god,  and  the  change 
was  eminently  adapted  to  make  him  to 
whom  it  was  given  forget  the  true  God  to 
whom,  in  earlier  days,  he  had  been 
devoted.  It  was  only  extraordinary  grace 
which  could  have  kept  these  youths  in 
the  paths  of  their  early  training,  and  in 
the  faithful  service  of  that  God  to  whom 
they  had  been  early  consecrated,  amidst 
the  temptations  by  which  they  wore  now 
surrounded  in  a  foreign  land,  and  the 
influences  which  were  employed  to  alien- 
ate them  from  the  God  of  their  fathers. 

S.  But  Daniel  purposed  in  his  heart. 
Evidently  in  concurrence  with  the  youths 
who  had  been  selected  with  him.  See 
vs.  11-13.  Daniel,  it  seems,  formed  this 
{i,s  a  decided  purpose,  and  meant  to  carry 
It  into  effect  as  a  matter  of  principle, 
though  he  designed  to  secure  his  object, 
if  possible,  by  making  a  request  that  he 
might  be  allowed  to  pursue  that  course 
(yer.  11),  and  wished  not  to  give  offence, 
3r  to  provoke  opposition.  What  would 
t\ave  been  tho  result  if  he  had  not  ob- 
tained permission,  wo  know  not,  but  the 
pfobftbility  is,  that  he  would  have  thrown 


meat,  nor  with  the  wine  which  he 
drank :  therefore  he  requested  of  the 
prince  of  the  eunuchs  that  he  might 
not  defile  himself. 


himself  upon  the  protection  of  God,  as  ho 
afterwards  did  (ch.  vi.),  and  would  have 
done  what  he  considered  to  be  duty,  re- 
gardless of  consequences.  The  course 
which  he  took  saved  him  from  tho  trial, 
for  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  was  willing 
to  allow  him  to  make  tho  experiment 
ver.  14.  It  is  always  better,  oven  whero 
there  is  decided  principle,  and  a  settled 
purpose  in  a  matter,  to  obtain  an  object 
by  a  peaceful  request,  than  to  attempt  to 
secure  it  by  violence.  %  That  he  woidd 
not  defile  himself  with  the  p>ortion  of  the 
hincf's  meat.  Notes,  ver.  5.  The  word 
which  is  rendered  defile  himself — '^'^Jnj 
—  from  ^X^  —  is  commonly  used  in  con- 
nection with  redcmpition,  its  first  and 
usual  meaning  being  to  redeem,  to  ran- 
som. In  later  Hebrew,  however,  it  means, 
to  be  defiled;  to  be  polluted;  to  be  un- 
clean. The  connection  between  these  sig- 
nifications of  the  word  is  not  apparent, 
unless,  as  redemption  was  accomplished 
with  the  shedding  of  blood,  rendering  the 
place  where  it  was  shed  defiled,  the  idea 
came  to  be  permanently  attached  to  the 
word.  The  defilement  here  referred  to 
in  the  case  of  Daniel,  probably  was,  that 
by  partaking  of  this  food  he  might,  in 
some  way,  be  regarded  as  countenancing 
idolatry,  or  as  lending  his  sanction  to  a 
mode  of  living  which  was  inconsistent 
with  his  principles,  and  which  was  peril- 
ous to  his  health  and  morals.  The  Syriac 
renders  this  simply,  that  he  vrould  not  eat, 
without  implying  that  there  would  be 
defilement.  ^  Nor  with  the  wine  which 
he  drank.  As  being  contrary  to  his  prin- 
ciples, and  perilous  to  his  morals  and 
hapj)iness.  *l  Therefore  he  requested  of 
the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  that  he  mijht  not 
defile  himself.  That  he  might  be  per- 
mitted to  abstain  from  the  luxuries  set 
before  him.  It  would  seem  from  this,  that 
he  represented  to  the  prince  of  the 
eunuchs  the  real  danger  which  he  appre- 
hended, or  the  real  cause  why  he  wished 
to  abstain — that  he  would  regard  the  use 
of  these  viands  as  contrary  to  the  habits 
which  he  had  formed ;  as  a  violation  of 
the  principles  of  his  religion ;  and  as,  in 
his  circumstances,  wrong  as  well  as  peril- 
ous.    This  he  presented  as  a  )•e5l(M^    Hij 


96 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  606. 


asked  it,  therefore,  as  a  favour,  prefer- 
ing  to  use  mikl  and  gcutlo  means  for 
securing  the  object,  rather  than  to  put 
himself  in  the  attitude  of  open  resistance 
to  the  wishes  of  the  monarch.  What 
reanons  influenced  him  to  choose  this 
course,  and  to  ask  to  be  permitted  to  live 
on  a  more  temperate  and  abstemious  diet, 
we  are  not  informed.  Assuming,  how- 
ever, what  is  apparent  from  the  whole 
narrative,  that  he  had  been  educated  in 
the  doctrines  of  the  true  religion,  and  in 
the  principles  of  temperance,  it  is  cot 
difficult  to  conceive  what  reasons  would 
influence  a  virtuous  youth  in  such  circum- 
stances, and  we  cannot  he  in  much  dan- 
ger of  error  in  suggesting  the  following : 
(1.)  It  is  not  improbable  that  the  food 
which  was  offered  him  had  been,  in  some 
waj',  connected  with  idolatry,  and  that 
his  participation  in  it  would  be  construed 
as  countenancing  the  worship  of  idols. 
Caloiii.  It  is  known  that  a  part  of  the 
animals  offered  in  sacrifice  was  sold  in 
the  market;  and  known,  also,  that  splendid 
entertainments  were  often  made  in  honour 
of  particular  idols,  and  on  the  sacrifices 
which  had  been  offered  to  them.  Comp. 
1  Cor.  viii.  Doubtless,  also,  a  considerable 
part  of  the  food  which  was  served  up  at 
the  royal  table  consisted  of  articles  which, 
by  the  Jewish  law,  were  prohibited  as 
unclean.  It  was  represented  by  the  pro- 
phets, as  one  part  of  the  evils  of  a  cap- 
tivity in  a  foreign  land,  that  the  people 
would  be  under  a  necessity  of  eating  that 
which  was  regarded  as  unclean.  Thus,  in 
Ezekiel  iv.  13  :  "  And  the  Lord  said.  Even 
thus  shall  the  children  of  Israel  eat  their 
defiled  bread  among  the  Gentiles,  whither 
I  will  drive  them."  llosea  ix.  3:  "  They 
shall  not  dwell  in  the  Lord's  land,  but 
Ephraim  shall  return  to  Egypt ;  and  shall 
eat  unclean  things  in  Assj'ria."  Rosen- 
miiller  remarks  on  this  passage  (Alte  u. 
neuc  Morgenland,  1070),  "It  was  cus- 
tomary among  the  ancients  to  bring  a 
portion  of  that  which  was  eaten  and 
drank  as  an  offering  to  the  gods,  as  a 
sign  of  thankful  recognition  that  all  which 
men  enjoy  is  their  gift.  Among  the  llo- 
mans  these  gifts  were  called  ii  bam  in  a,  so 
that  with  each  meal  there  was  connected 
an  act  of  off"ering.  Hence  Daniel  and  his 
friends  regarded  that  which  was  brought 
from  the  royal  table  as  food  which  had 
been  offered  to  the  gods,  and  therefore  as 
impure."  (2.)  Daniel  and  his  friends 
were,  doubtless,  restrained  from  partaking 


of  the  food  and  drink  offtred  to  them  by 
a  regard  to  the  principles  of  temperance 
in  which  they  had  been  educated,  and  by 
a  fear  of  the  consequences  which  would 
follow  from  indulgence.  They  had  evi- 
dently been  trained  in  the  ways  of  strict 
temperance.  But  now  new  scenes  open- 
ed to  them,  and  new  temptations  were 
before  them.  They  were  among  strangers. 
Tbey  were  noticed  and  flattered.  They 
had  an  opportunity  of  indulging  in  the 
pleasures  of  the  table,  such  as  captive 
youth  rarely  enjoyed.  This  opportunity, 
there  can  be  no  doubt,  they  regarded  as  a 
temptation  to  their  virtue,  and  as  in  the 
highest  degree  perilous  to  their  principles, 
and  thej',  therefore,  sought  to  resist  the 
temptation.  They  were  captives  —  exiles 
from  their  country — in  circumstances  of 
great  depression  and  humiliation,  and 
they  did  not  wish  to  forget  that  circum- 
stance. Call-in.  Their  land  was  in  ruins  ; 
the  temple  where  they  and  their  fathers 
had  worshipped  had  been  desecrated  and 
plundered ;  their  kindred  and  country- 
men were  pining  in  exile;  everything 
called  them  to  a  mode  of  life  which  would 
be  in  accordance  with  these  melancholy 
facts,  and  thcj',  doubtless,  felt  that  it 
would  be  in  every  way  inappropriate  for 
them  to  indulge  in  luxurious  living,  and 
revel  in  the  pleasures  of  a  banquet.  But 
they  were  also,  doubtless,  restrained  from 
these  indulgences  by  a  reference  to  the 
dangers  which  would  follow.  It  required 
not  great  penetration  or  experience,  in- 
deed, to  perceive,  that  in  their  circum- 
stances—  young  men  as  they  were  sud- 
denly noticed  and  honoured — compliance 
would  be  perilous  to  their  virtue  :  but  it 
did  require  uncommon  strength  of  prin- 
ciple to  meet  the  temptation.  Rare  has 
been  the  stern  virtue  among  young  men 
which  could  resist  so  strong  allurements  ; 
seldom,  comparatively,  have  those  who 
have  been  unexpectedly  thrown,  in  the 
course  of  events,  into  the  temptations  of 
a  great  city,  in  a  foreign  land,  and  flatter- 
ed by  the  attention  of  those  in  the  higher 
walks  of  life,  been  sufficiently  firm  in  prin- 
ciple to  assert  the  early  principles  of  tem- 
perance and  virtue  in  which  they  may  have 
been  trained.  Rare  has  it  been  that  a 
youth  in  such  circumstances  would  form 
the  steady  purpose  not  to  '  defile  himself 
by  the  tempting  allurements  set  btfore 
him,  and  that,  at  all  hazards,  he  would 
adhere  to  the  principles  in  which  he  had 
been  educated. 


J5.  C.  60G.J 


C  II  APT  Ell  i. 


91 


9  Now  God  had  brought  Daniel 
into  ""  favour  and  tender  love  with 
the  prince  of  the  eunuchs. 

10  And  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs 
said  unto  Daniel,  I  fear  my  lord 
the  king,  who  hath  appointed  your 

»  Gen.  39. 21 ;  Prov.  16.  7. 

9.  Nolo  God  had  brought  Daniel  into 
favour.  Comp.  Clen.  xxxix.  21;  Prov. 
xvi.  7,  By  what  means  this  had  been 
done  is  not  mentioned.  It  may  be  pre- 
sumed, however,  that  it  was  by  the 
attractiveness  of  his  person  and  manners, 
and  by  the  evidence  of  promising  talent 
which  he  had  evinced.  Whatever  were 
the  means,  however,  two  things  are 
worthy  of  notice:  (1.)  The  effect  of  this 
on  the  subsequent  fortunes  of  Daniel.  It 
was  to  him  a  great  advantage,  that  by  the 
friendsliip  of  this  man  he  was  enabled  to 
carry  out  the  purposes  of  temperance  and 
religion  which  he  had  formed,  without 
coming  in  conflict  with  those  who  were  in 
power.  (2.)  God  was  the  author  of  the 
tavour  which  was  thus  shown  to  Daniel. 
It  was  by  a  controlling  influence  which 
he  exerted,  that  Uiis  result  had  been 
secured,  and  Daniel  traced  it  directly  to 
him.  We  may  hence  learn  that  the  favour 
of  others  towards  us  is  to  be  traced  to  the 
hand  of  God,  and  if  we  are  prospered  in 
the  world,  and  are  permitted  to  enjoy  the 
friendship  of  those  who  have  it  in  their 
power  to  benefit  us,  thc-ugh  it  may  bo  on 
account  of  our  personal  qualifications,  we 
should  learn  to  attribute  it  all  to  God. 
There  would  have  been  great  reason  to 
apprehend  beforehand,  that  the  refusal  of 
Daniel  and  his  companions  to  partake  of 
the  food  prepared  for  them  would  have 
been  construed  as  an  affront  offered  to  the 
king,  especially  if  it  was  understood  to  be 
on  the  ground  that  they  regarded  it  as 
dcfllcjiient  or  pollution  to  partake  of  it; 
but  God  overruled  it  all  so  as  to  secure  the 
favour  of  those  in  power. 

10.  And  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  said 
unto  Daniel,  I  fear  my  lord  the  Icing.  He 
was  apprehensive  that  if  Daniel  appeared 
less  healthful,  or  cheerful,  or  beautiful, 
than  it  was  supposed  he  would  under  the 
prescribed  mode  of  life,  it  would  be  con- 
Btrued  as  disobedience  of  the  commands 
of  the  king  on  his  part,  and  that  it  would 
be  inferred  that  the  wan  and  emaciated 
appearance  of  Daniel  was  caused  by  the 
fact  that  the  food  which  had  been  ordered 

9 


meat  and  your  drink :  for  why 
should  he  see  your  faces  •>  worse 
liking  than  the  children  which 
are  of  your  c  sort  ?  then  shall  ye 
make  me  endanger  my  head  to  the 
king, 
b  Sadder.         '  Or,  term,  or,  continuance. 


had  not  been  furnished,  but  had  been 
embezzled  by  the  officer  who  had  it  in 
charge.  We  have  only  to  remember  the 
strict  and  arbitrary  nature  of  Oriental 
monarchies  to  see  that  there  was  just 
grounds  for  the  apprehensions  here  ex- 
pressed. ^  For  why  should  he  see  your 
faces  worse  liking.  Marg.,  sadder.  The 
Hebrew  word —  ccyt  — means  properly, 
angry ;  and  then  morose,  gloomy,  sad. 
The  primary  idea  seems  to  be,  that 
of  any  painful,  or  unpleasant  emotion 
of  the  mind  which  depicts  itself  on 
the  countenance — whether  anger,  sorrow, 
env}-,  lowness  of  spirits,  <fec.  Greek, 
oKvipwnd  —  stern,  gloomy,  sad.  Matt.  vi. 
16;  Luke  xxiv.  17.  Here  the  reference 
is  not  to  the  expression  of  angry  feelings 
in  the  countenance,  but  to  the  counte- 
nance as  fallen  away  by  fasting,  or  poor 
living.  ^  Than  the  children.  The  youths, 
or  young  men.  The  same  word  is  here 
used  which  occurs  in  ver.  4.  Comp.  Notes 
on  that  verse.  ^  Which  are  of  your  sort. 
Marg.,  term,  or  co7itinuance.  The  Hebrew 
word  here  used  —  ^"i — means  properly, 
a  circle,  or  circuit;  hence  an  age,  and  then 
the  men  of  an  age,  a  generation.  Ge- 
senius.  The  word  is  not  used,  however, 
in  the  Scriptures  elsewhere  in  this  sense. 
Elsewhere  it  is  rendered  joy,  or  rejoicing. 
Job.  iii.  22 ;  Ps.  xliii.  4,  .xlv.  15,  Ixv.  12 ; 
Prov.  xxiii.  24;  Isa.  xvi.  10,  xxxv.  2,  Ixv. 
18  ,  Jer.  xlviii.  33;  Hos.  ix.  1  ;  Joel  i.  IG. 
This  meaning  it  has  from  the  usual  sense 
of  the  verb —  7^^  —  to  exult,  or  rejoice. 
The  verb  properly  means  to  move  in  a 
circle ;  then  to  dance  in  a  circle ;  and  then 
to  exult  or  rejoice.  The  word  "circle," 
as  often  used  now  to  denote  those  of  a 
certain  class,  rank,  or  character,  would 
accurately  express  the  sense  here.  Thus 
we  speak  of  those  in  the  religious  circles, 
in  the  social  circles,  &c.  The  reference 
here  is  to  those  of  the  same  class  with 
Daniel ;  to  wit,  in  the  arrangements  made 
for  presenting  them  before  the  king.  Gr., 
oui  iiAiva  lyui' — of  your  age.     ^  Then  ehall 


98 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  o06 


1 1  Then  said  Daniel  to  >  Mclzar, !  thee,  ten  days ;  and  let  them  give 


whom  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs 
had  set  over  Daniel,  Ilananiah, 
Mishael,  and  Azariah, 

12  Prove  thy  servants,  I  beseech 
a  Or,  the  steward. 


ye  make  me  endanrjer  mrj  head  to  the  Icinrj, 
As  if  he  had  disregarded  the  orders  given 
him,  or  had  embezzled  what  had  been 
provided  for  these  youths,  and  had  fur- 
nished them  with  inferior  fare.  In  the 
arbitrary  courts  of  the  East,  nothing  would 
be  more  natural  than  that  such  an  appa- 
rent failure  in  the  performance  of  what 
was  enjoined  would  peril  his  life.  The 
word  here  used,  and  rendered  make  me 
endanger  —  3'n  —  occurs  nowhere  else 
in  the  Bible.  It  means,  in  Piel,  to 
make  guilt3' ;  to  cause  to  forfeit.  Greek, 
KuraSiKaaarc  —  you  will  Condemn,  or  cause 
me  to  be  condemned. 

11.  Then  said  Daniel  to  Melzar,  ichom 
the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  had  set  over 
Daniel,  &c.  'Ma.rg.  or,  the  steicard.  It  is 
not  easy  to  determine  whether  the  word 
here  used  —  "^S'pD  —  Mchar,  is  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  proper  name,  or  the  name  of 
an  oflScc.  It  occurs  nowhere  else,  except 
in  ver.  16  of  this  chapter,  applied  to  the 
same  person.  Gesenius  regards  it  as 
denoting  the  name  of  an  office  in  the 
Babj'lonian  court  —  master  of  the  wine, 
chief  butler.  Others  regard  it  as  meaning 
a  treasurer.  The  word  is  still  in  use  in 
Persia.  The  Vulgate  renders  it  as  a 
proper  name — Jfalasar  ;  and  so  the  Sj-riac 
— Ifeshitzar ;  and  so  the  Greek — 'Aijs\aai 
—AmeUad.  The  use  of  the  article  in  the 
word  —  i^'^Sl!  —  would  seem  to  imply  that 
it  denoted  the  name  of  an  oj/ice,  and 
nothing  would  be  more  probable  than 
that  the  actual  furnishing  of  the  daily 
portion  of  food  would  be  entrusted  to  a 
steward,  or  to  some  incumbent  of  an  office 
inferior  to  that  sustained  by  Ashpenaz. 
Ver.  3. 

12.  Prove  thy  servants,  I  beseech  thee, 
ten  days.  A  period  which  would  indicate 
the  probable  result  of  the  entire  experi- 
ment. If  during  that  period  there  were 
no  indications  of  diminished  health, 
beautj',  or  vigour,  it  would  not  be  unfair 
to  presumo  that  the  experiment  in  behalf 
of  teniforance  would  be  successful,  and  it 
would  not  be  improper  then  to  ask  that  it 
mii?ht  be  continued  longer.      •[  And  let 


us  "  pulse  '^  to  eat,   and  water    to 
drink. 

13  Then  let  our  countenances  be 
looked  upon  before  thee,   and  the 

b  0/ pulse  that  we  may  eat.      <=  Thattcemay. 


them  give  us  pulse  to  eat.  Marg.  of 
pulse  that  ice  may  eat.  lleb.  'Let  them 
give  us  of  pulse,  and  we  will  eat'  The 
word  pidse  with  us  means  leguminous 
plants  with  thin  seeds;  that  is,  plants 
with  a  pericarp,  or  seed-vessel,  of  two 
valves,  having  the  seeds  fixed  to  one 
suture  only.  In  popular  language  the 
legume  is  called  a  pod ;  as  a  pea-pod,  or 
bean-pod,  and  the  word  is  commonly  ap- 
plied to  peas  or  beans.  The  Hebrew 
word  —  O^y"^!.  —  would  properly  have  re- 
ference to  seeds  of  any  kind  —  from  J" "}  I 
zdra,  to  disperse,  to  scatter  seed,  to  sow. 
Then  it  would  refer  to  plants  that  bear 
seed,  of  all  kinds,  and  would  be  by  no 
means  limited  to  pulse — as  peas  or  beans. 
It  is  rendered  by  Gesenius,  ''seed-herbs, 
greens,  vegetables;  i.  e.  vegetable  food, 
such  as  was  eaten  in  a  half-fast,  opposed 
to  meats  and  the  more  delicate  kinds  of 
food."  The  word  occurs  only  here  and  in 
ver.  16.  It  is  rendered  in  the  Vulgate, 
legnmina;  and  in  the  Greek,  and  rwv 
anepiii'iToyv  —  'from  seeds.'  It  is  not  a 
proper  construction  to  limit  this  to  pidsc, 
or  to  suppose  that  Daniel  desired  to  live 
solely  on  peas  or  beans,  but  the  fair  inter- 
pretation is  to  apply  it  to  that  which 
grows  up  from  seeds  ;  such,  probably,  as 
would  be  sown  in  a  garden,  or,  as  we 
would  now  express  it,  vegetable  diet.  It 
was  designed  as  an  experiment — and  was 
a  very  interesting  one — to  show  the  legiti 
mate  effect  of  such  a  diet  in  promoting 
beauty  and  health,  and  the  result  is 
worthy  of  special  notice  as  contrasted 
with  a  more  luxurious  mode  of  life.  ^  And 
water  to  drink.  This,  also,  was  a  most 
interesting  and  important  experiment,  to 
show  that  wine  was  not  necessary  to  pro- 
duce healthfulness  of  appearance,  or 
manly  strength  and  beauty.  It  was  an 
experiment  to  illustrate  the  effect  of  cold 
uater  as  a  beverage,  made  by  an  interest- 
ing group  of  young  men,  when  sur- 
rounded by  great  temptations,  and  is, 
therefore,  worthy  of  particular  attention. 
13.  Then  let  our  countenances  be  looked 
upon.     One  of  the  objects  to  be  secured  by 


B.  C.  G06.] 


CHAPTER   I. 


di 


countenance  of  the  children  that  eat 
of  the  portion  of  the  king's  meat : 
and  as  thou  seest,  deal  with  thy 
servants. 

14  So  he  consented  to  them  in  this 
matter,  and  proved  them  ten  days. 


this  whole  trial  was  to  promote  their  per- 
sonal beauty,  and  their  healthful  appear- 
ance (vs.  4,  5),  and  Daniel  was  willing 
that  the  trial  should  be  made  with  re- 
ference to  that,  and  that  a  judgment 
should  be  formed  from  the  observed  effect 
of  their  temperate  mode  of  life.  The 
Hebrew  word  rendered  countenance  — 
n?<"5P — is  not  limited  to  tlie  face,  as  the 
word  countenance  is  with  us.  It  refers  to 
the  whole  appearance,  the  form,  the 
'  looks  ;'  and  the  expression  here  is  equiva- 
lent to,  '  Then  look  on  us,  and  see  what 
the  result  has  been,  and  deal  with  us  ac- 
cordingl}'.'  The  Greek  is,  al  licai  i,^av  — 
onr  appearance.  ^  Of  the  children. 
Youths;  young  men.  Notes,  ver.  4.  The 
reference  is,  probably,  to  the  Chaldean 
youths  who  were  trained  up  amidst  the 
luxuries  of  the  court.  It  is  possible,  how- 
ever, that  the  reference  is  to  Hebrew 
youths  who  were  less  scrupulous  than 
Daniel  and  his  companions.  ^  And  as 
thou  seest,  deal  with  thy  servants.  As  the 
result  shall  be.  That  is,  let  us  be  pre- 
sented at  court,  and  promoted  or  not,  as 
the  result  of  our  mode  of  living  shall  be. 
What  the  effect  would  have  been  if  there 
had  been  a  failure,  we  are  not  informed. 
Whether  it  would  have  endangered  their 
lives,  or  whether  it  would  have  been 
merely  a  forfeiture  of  the  proffered  hon- 
ours and  advantages,  we  have  no  means 
of  determining.  It  is  evident  that  Daniel 
had  no  apprehension  as  to  the  issue. 

14.  So  he  consented  to  them  in  this  mat- 
ter. Heb.,  '  he  heard  them  in  this  thing.' 
The  expei-iment  was  such,  since  it  was  to 
be  for  so  short  a  time,  that  he  ran  little 
risk  in  the  matter,  as  it  the  end  of  the 
ten  days  he  supposed  that  it  would  be 
easy  to  change  their  mode  of  diet  if  the 
trial  was  unsuccessful. 

15.  And  at  the  end  of  ten  days  their 
countenances  appeared  fairer.  Heb., 
'good;'  that  is,  they  appeared  more  beau- 
tiful and  healthful.  The  experiment  was 
Buceessful.  There  was  no  diminution  of 
beauty,  of  vigour,  or  of  the  usual  indlca- 
liots  of  health.     One  o"  the  results  of  a 


15  Atd  at  fhe  end  of  ten  days 
their  countenances  appeared  fairer 
and  fatter  in  flesh  than  all  the  child- 
ren which  did  e.at  the  portion  of  the 
kino-'s  meat. 


course  of  temperance  appears  in  the  coun- 
tenance, and  it  is  among  the  wise  ap- 
pointments of  God  that  it  should  be  so. 
He  has  so  made  us,  that  while  the  other 
parts  of  the  body  may  be  protected 
from  the  gaze  of  men,  it  is  necessary 
that  the  face  should  be  exposed.  Hence 
he  has  made  the  countenance  the  prin- 
cipal seat  of  expression,  for  the  chief 
muscles  which  indicate  expression  have 
their  location  there.  See  the  valuable 
work  of  Sir  Charles  Bell  on  "  The 
Anatomy  of  Expression."  London,  184-4. 
Hence  there  are  certain  marks  of  guilt 
and  vice  which  always  are  indicated  in 
the  countenance.  God  has  so  made  us 
that  the  drunkard  and  the  glutton  must 
proclaim  their  own  guilt  and  shame.  Tho 
bloated  face,  the  haggard  aspect,  the  look 
of  folly,  the  '■  heaviness  of  the  eye,  the 
disposition  to  squint,  and  to  see  double, 
and  a  forcible  elevation  of  the  eyebrow  to 
counteract  the  dropping  of  the  upper  eye- 
lid, and  preserve  the  eyes  from  closing," 
are  all  marks  which  God  has  appointed 
to  betray  and  expose  the  life  of  indul- 
gence. Arrangements  are  made  for  these 
expressions  in  the  very  anatomy  of  tho 
face,  and  no  art  of  man  can  prevent  it. 
Bell,  on  the  Anatomy  of  Expression,  p. 
106.  God  meant  that  if  man  would  be 
intemperate  he  should  himself  proclaim  it 
to  the  world,  and  that  his  fellow-men 
should  be  apprized  of  his  guilt.  This  was 
intended  to  be  one  of  the  s.afeguards  of 
virtue.  The  young  man  who  will  be  in- 
temperate knoics  what  the  result  must  be. 
He  is  apprized  of  it  in  the  loathsome 
aspect  of  every  drunkard  whom  he  meets. 
He  knows  that  if  he  yields  himself  to  in- 
dulgence in  intoxicating  drink,  he  must 
soon  proclaim  it  himself  to  the  wide  world. 
No  matter  how  beautiful,  or  fresh,  or 
blooming,  or  healthful,  he  may  now  be; 
no  matter  how  bright  the  eye,  or  ruddy 
the  cheek,  or  eloquent  the  tongue,  the 
eye,  and  the  cheek,  and  the  tongue,  will 
soon  become  indices  of  his  manner  of 
life,  and  the  loathsomeness  and  offensivo- 
ness  of  the  once  beautiful  and  blooming 


100 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  606. 


16  Thus   Melzar  took   away  the 
portion  of  their  meat,  and  the  wine 


countenance  must  pay  the  penalty  of  his 
folly.  And  in  like  manner,  and  for  the 
same  reason,  the  countenance  is  an  indi- 
cation of  temperance  and  purity.  The 
bright  and  steady  eye,  the  blooming 
cheek,  the  lips  that  eloquently  or  grace- 
fully utter  the  sentiments  of  virtue,  pro- 
claim the  purity  of  the  life,  and  are  the 
natural  indices  to  our  fellow  men  that  we 
live  in  accordance  with  the  great  and 
benevolent  laws  of  our  nature,  and  are 
among  the  rewards  of  temperance  and 
virtue. 

16.  Thus  ITehar  took  awai/  the  portion 
of  their  meat,  d-c.  Doubtless  permanently. 
The  experiment  had  been  satisfactory, 
and  it  was  inferred  that  if  the  course  of 
temperance  could  be  practised  for  ten 
days  without  unhappy  results,  there  would 
be  safety  in  suffering  it  to  be  continued. 
We  may  remark  on  this :  I.  That  the  ex- 
periment was  a  most  important  one,  not 
only  for  the  object  then  immediately  in 
view,  but  for  furnishing  lessons  of  per- 
manent instruction  adapted  to  future 
times.  It  was  worth  one  sucli  trial,  and 
it  was  desirable  to  have  one  such  illustra- 
tion of  the  effect  of  temperance  recorded. 
There  are  so  strong  propensities  in  our 
nature  to  indulgence  ;  there  are  so  many 
temptations  set  before  the  young ;  there 
is  so  much  that  allures  in  a  luxurious 
mode  of  life,  and  so  much  of  conviviality 
and  happiness  is  supposed  to  be  connected 
with  the  social  glass,  that  it  was  well  to 
have  a  fair  trial  made,  and  that  the  result 
should  be  recorded  for  the  instruction  of 
"uturc  times.  II.  It  was  especially  dc- 
u^rable  that  the  experiment  should  be 
made  of  the  effect  of  strict  abstinence 
from  the  use  of  mine.  Distilled  liquors 
were  indeed  then  unknown  ;  but  alcohol, 
the  intoxicating  principle  in  nil  ardent 
spirits,  then  existed,  as  it  does  now,  in 
wine,  and  was  then,  as  it  is  now,  of  the 
same  nature  as  when  found  in  other  sub- 
stances. It  was  in  the  use  of  wine  that 
the  principal  danger  of  intemperance  then 
lay;  and  it  may  be  added,  that  in  refer- 
ence to  a  very  large'  class  of  persons  of 
both  sexes,  it  is  in  the  use  of  wine  that 
the  principal  danger  always  lies.  There 
are  multitudes,  especially  of  young  men, 
who  are  in  little  or  no  danger  of  becoming 
Jutemperato  from  the  use  of  the  stronger 


that  they  should  drink ;   and  gav« 
them  puLse. 


kinds  of  intoxicating  drinks.  They  would 
never  begin  with  them.  But  the  use  of 
wine  is  so  respectable  in  the  view  of  the 
upper  classes  of  society ;  it  is  deemed  so 
essential  to  the  banquet;  it  constitutes  so 
much,  apparentlj',  a  mark  of  distinction, 
from  the  fact  that  ordinarily  only  the 
rich  can  afford  to  indulge  in  it ;  its  use  is 
regarded  extensively  as  so  proper  for  even 
refined  and  delicate  females,  and  is  so 
often  sanctioned  by  their  participating  in 
it ;  it  is  so  difficult  to  frame  an  argument 
against  it  that  will  be  decisive  ;  there  is  so 
much  that  is  plausible  that  may  be  said 
in  favour  or  in  justification  of  its  use,  and 
it  is  so  much  sanctioned  by  the  ministers  of 
religion,  and  by  those  of  influence  in  the 
churches,  that  one  of  the  principal  dangers 
of  the  young  arises  from  the  temptation 
to  indulgence  in  wine,  and  it  was  well 
that  there  should  be  a  fair  trial  of  the  com- 
parative benefit  of  total  abstinence.  A 
trial  could  scarcely  have  been  made  un- 
der better  circumstances  than  in  the  case 
before  us.  There  was  every  inducement 
to  indulgence  which  is  ever  likely  to 
occur ;  there  was  as  much  to  make  it  a 
mere  matter  of  principle  to  abstain  from 
it  as  can  be  found  now  in  any  circum- 
stances, and  the  experiment  was  as  tri- 
umphant and  satisfactory  as  could  be 
desired.  III.  The  result  of  the  experi- 
ment, (a)  It  was  complete  and  satisfac- 
tory. 3lore  was  accomplished  in  the 
matter  of  the  trial  by  abstinence  than  by 
indulgence.  Those  who  abstained  were 
niore  healthful,  more  beautiful,  more 
vigorous  than  the  others.  And  there  was 
nothing  miraculous — nothing  that  occur- 
red in  that  case  which  does  not  occur  in 
similar  cases.  Sir  J.  Chardin  remarks, 
respecting  those  whom  he  had  seen  in  the 
East,  ''  that  the  countenances  of  the 
kechicks  [monks]  are  in  fact  more  rosy 
and  smooth  than  those  of  others  ;  and  that 
those  who  fast  much,  I  mean  the  Arme- 
nians and  the  Greeks,  are,  notwithstand- 
ing, very  beautiful,  sparkling  witk  health, 
with  a  clear  and  lively  countenance." 
He  also  takes  notice  of  the  very  great 
abstemiousness  of  the  Brahmins  in  the 
Indies,  who  lodge  on  the  ground,  abstain 
from  music,  from  all  sorts  of  agreeable 
smells,  who  go  very  meanly  clothed,  are 
almost  always  wet,  either  by  going  intc 


B.C.  606.1 


CIIAPTEK   1. 


101 


water,  or  by  rain,  "  yet,"  says  he,  "  I  have 
seen  also  many  of  them  very  handsome 
and  healthful."'  llarmar's  Observa.  ii. 
pp.  112,  113.  (h)  The  experiment  has 
often  been  made,  and  with  equal  success, 
in  modern  times,  and  especially  since  the 
commencement  of  the  temperance  re- 
formation, and  an  opportunity  has  been 
given  of  furnisliing  the  most  decisive 
proofs  of  the  effects  of  temperance  in  con- 
trast with  indulgence  in  the  use  of  wine, 
and  of  other  intoxicating  drinks.  This 
experiment  has  been  made  on  a  wide 
scale,  and  with  the  same  result.  It  is 
demonstrated,  as  in  the  case  of  Daniel, 
that  "  more"  will  be  secured  of  that  which 
men  are  so  anxious  usuall}'  to  obtain,  and 
of  that  which  it  is  desirable  to  obtain,  than 
can  be  by  indulgence.  (1.)  There  will  be 
"more"  beauty  of  personal  appearance. 
Indulgence  in  intoxicating  drinks  leaves 
its  traces  on  the  countenance  —  the  skin, 
the  eye,  the  nose,  the  whole  expression — 
as  God  meant  it  should.  See  Notes  on 
ver.  15.  No  one  can  hope  to  retain  beauty 
of  complexion  or  countenance  who  in- 
dulges freely  in  the  use  of  intoxicating 
drinks.  (2.)  "More"  clearness  of  mind 
and  intellectual  vigour  can  be  secured  by 
abstinence  than  by  indulgence.  It  is  true 
that,  as  was  often  the  case  with  Byron 
and  Burns,  stimulating  drinks  may  excite 
the  mind  to  brilliant  temporary  efforts ; 
but  the  etlect  soon  ceases,  and  the  mind 
makes  a  compensation  for  its  over-worked 
powers  by  sinking  down  below  its  proper 
level  as  it  had  been  excited  above.  It 
will  demand  a  penalty  in  the  exhausted 
energies,  and  in  the  incapacity  for  even  its 
usual  efforts,  and  unless  the  exhausting 
stimulus  be  again  applied,  it  cannot  rise 
even  to  its  usual  level,  and  when  often 
applied,  the  mind  is  divested  of  all  its 
elasticity  and  vigour  :  the  physical  frame 
loses  its  power  to  endure  the  excitement; 
and  the  light  of  genius  is  put  out,  and  the 
body  sinks  to  the  grave.  He  who  wishes 
to  make  the  most  of  his  mind  in  the  long 
run,  whatever  genius  he  may  be  endowed 
with,  will  be  a  temperate  man.  His 
powers  will  be  retained  uniformly  at  a 
higher  elevation,  and  they  will  maintain 
their  balance  and  their  vigour  longer. 
(3.)  The  same  is  true  in  regard  to  every- 
thing which  requires  vigour  of  body. 
The  Roman  soldier,  who  carried  his  eagle 
around  the  world,  and  who  braved  the 
dangers  of  every  clime — equally  bold  and 
tigorous,  and  hardy,  and  daring  amidst 


polar  snows,  and  the  burning  sands  of  the 
equator,  was  a  stranger  to  intoxicating 
drinks.  He  was  allowed  only  vinegai 
and  water,  and  his  extraordinary  vigoui 
was  the  result  of  the  most  abstemious 
fare.  The  wrestlers  in  the  Olympiac  aud 
Isthmian  games,  who  did  as  much  to  give 
suppleness,  vigour,  and  beauty  to  the 
body,  as  could  be  done  by  the  most  care- 
ful training,  abstained  from  the  use  of 
wine  and  all  that  would  enervate.  Sinc^ 
the  temperance  reformation  commenced  in 
this  land,  the  experiment  has  been  made 
in  every  way  possible,  and  it  has  been 
settled  that  a  man  will  do  more  work,  and 
do  it  better;  that  he  can  bear  more 
fatigue,  can  travel  farther,  can  better 
endure  the  severity  of  cold  in  the  winter, 
and  of  toil  in  the  heat  of  summer,  by 
strict  temperance,  than  he  can  if  he  in- 
dulges in  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks. 
Never  was  the  result  of  an  experiment 
more  uniform  than  this  has  been  ;  never 
has  there  been  a  case  where  the  testimony 
of  those  who  have  had  an  opportunity  of 
witnessing  it,  was  more  decided  and 
harmonious;  never  was  there  a  question 
in  rog.ird  to  the  effect  of  a  certain  course 
on  health  in  which  the  testimony  of  phy- 
sicians have  been  more  uniform ;  and 
never  has  there  been  a  question  in  regard 
to  the  amount  of  labour  which  a  man 
could  do,  on  which  the  testimony  of  re- 
spectable farmers,  and  master  mechanics, 
and  overseers  of  public  works,  could  be 
more  decided.  (4.)  The  full  force  of  these 
remarks  about  temperance  in  general, 
applies  to  the  use  of  wine.  It  was  in 
respect  to  n-inc  that  the  experiment  before 
us  was  made,  and  it  is  this  which  gives  it, 
in  a  great  degree,  its  value  and  import- 
ance. Distilled  spirits  were  then  un- 
known, but  it  was  of  importance  that  a 
fair  experiment  should  be  made  of  the 
effect  of  abstinence  from  wine.  The  great 
danger  of  intemperance,  taking  the  world 
at  large,  has  been,  and  is  still,  from  the 
use  of  wine.  This  danger  affects  par- 
ticularly the  upper  classes  in  society,  and 
young  men.  It  is  by  the  use  of  wine,  in 
a  great  majority  of  instances,  that  the 
peril  commences,  and  that  the  habit  of 
drinking  is  formed.  Let  it  be  remem- 
bered, also,  that  the  intoxicating  princi- 
ple is  the  same  in  wine  as  in  any  other 
drink  that  produces  intemperance.  It  is 
alcohol — the  same  substance  precisely, 
whether  it  be  driven  off  by  heat  from 
wine,  beer,  or  cider,  and  condensed  by 


102 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  603. 


17  As  for  these  four  children, 
God  gave  them  knowledge  and  skill 
in  all  learning  and  wisdom :    and 

distillation,  or  whether  it  remain  in  these 
liquids  without  being  distilled.  It  is 
neither  more  or  less  intoxicating  in  one 
form  than  it  is  in  the  other.  It  is  only 
more  condensed  and  concentrated  in  one 
case  than  in  the  other;  better  capable  of 
preservation,  and  more  convenient  for 
purposes  of  commerce.  'Every  2}n»cij)le, 
therefore,  which  applies  to  the  temperance 
cause  at  all  applies  to  the  use  of  wine  ; 
and  every  consideration  derived  from 
health,  beauty,  vigour,  length  of  days, 
reputation,  property,  or  salvation,  which 
should  induce  a  young  man  to  abstain 
from  ardent  spirits  at  all  should  induce 
him  to  abstain,  as  Daniel  did,  from  the 
use  of  wine. 

17.  As  for  tJiese  four  children.  On  the 
word  children,  see  Notes  on  ver.  4.  Comp. 
ver.  6.  ^  God  gave  them  knowledge  and 
skill.  See  Notes  on  ver.  9.  There  is  no 
reason  to  suppose  that  in  the  "  knowledge 
and  skill"  here  referred  to,  it  is  meant  to 
be  implied  th.at  there  was  anything 
miraculous,  or  that  there  was  any  direct 
inspiration.  Inspiration  was  evidently 
confined  to  Daniel,  and  pertained  to  what 
is  spoken  of  under  the  head  of  "  visions 
and  dreams."  The  fact  that  all  this  was 
to  be  attributed  to  God  as  his  gift,  is  in 
accordance  with  the  common  method  of 
speaking  in  the  Scriptures ;  and  it  is  also 
in  accordance  with  fact,  that  all  know- 
ledge is  to  be  traced  to  God.  See  Ex. 
xxxi.  2,  3.  God  formed  the  intellect;  he 
preserves  the  exercise  of  reason ;  he  fur- 
nishes us  instructors ;  he  gives  us  clear- 
ness of  perception  ;  he  enables  us  to  take 
advantage  of  bright  thoughts  and  happy 
suggestions  which  occur  in  our  own 
minds,  as  much  as  he  sends  rain,  and 
dew,  and  sunshine  on  the  fields  of  the 
husbandman,  and  endows  him  with  skill. 
Comp.  Isa.  xxviii.  26,  "  For  his  God  doth 
instruct  him."  The  knowledge  and  skill 
which  we  may  acquire,  therefore,  should 
be  as  much  attributed  to  God  as  the  suc- 
cess of  the  farmer  should.  Comp.  Job 
xxxii.  8,  "  Fcr  there  is  a  spirit  in  man, 
and  the  inspiration  of  the  Almighty  giveth 
them  understanding."  In  the  case  before 
us,  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the 
natural  powers  of  these  young  men  had 
been  diligently  applied  during  the  three 


a  Daniel  had  understanding  in  all 

visions  and  dreams. 

*  Or,  !te  made  Daniel  understand. 


years  of  their  trial  (ver.  5),  and  under  the 
advantages  of  a  strict  course  of  tem- 
perance, and  that  the  knowledge  hue 
spoken  of  was  the  result  of  such  an  appli- 
cation to  their  studies.  On  the  meaning 
of  the  words  "knowledge"  and  "skill" 
here,  see  Notes  on  ver.  4.  5[  -^'^  «^^  learn- 
ing, and  loisdom.  See  also  Notes  on  ver.  4. 
^  And  Daniel  had  understanding.  Show- 
ing that  in  that  respect  there  was  a 
special  endowment  in  his  case;  a  kind  of 
kiiowledge  imparted  which  could  be  com- 
municated only  by  special  inspiration. 
The  margin  is,  he  made  Daniel  under- 
stand. The  margin  is  in  accordance  with 
the  Hebrew,  but  the  sense  is  the  same. 
^  In  all  visions.  On  the  word  rendered 
visio7is  —  jirr;!  • — see  Notes  on  Isa.  i.  1, 
and  Intro,  to  Isaiah,  §  7,  (4).  It  is  a 
term  frequently  employed  in  reference  to 
prophecy,  and  designates  the  usual  method 
by  which  future  events  were  made  known. 
The  prophet  was  permitted  to  see  those 
events  as  if  they  were  made  to  pass 
before  the  ej^e,  and  to  describe  them  as  if 
they  were  objects  of  sight.  Here  the 
word  seems  to  be  used  to  denote  all  super- 
natural appearances;  all  that  God  per- 
mitted him  to  see  that  in  any  way 
shadowed  forth  the  future.  It  would 
seem  that  men  who  were  not  inspired 
were  permitted  occasionally  to  behold 
such  supernatural  appearances,  though 
they  were  not  able  to  interpret  them. 
Thus  their  attention  would  be  particularly 
called  to  them,  and  they  would  be  pre- 
pared to  admit  the  truth  of  what  the 
interpreter  communicated  to  them.  Comp. 
ch.  iv.,  ch.  V.  5,  6 ;  Gen.  xl.  5,  xli.  1-7. 
Daniel  was  so  endowed  that  he  could  in- 
terpret the  meaning  of  these  mysterious 
appearances,  and  thus  convey  important 
messages  to  men.  The  same  endowment 
had  been  conferred  on  Joseph  when  in 
Egypt.  See  the  passages  referred  to  in 
Genesis.  \  And  dreams.  One  of  the 
ways  by  which  the  will  of  God  waa 
anciently  communicated  to  men.  See 
Intro,  to  Isai.ah,  §  7,  (2),  and  Notes  on 
Job  xxxiii.  14-18.  Daniel,  like  Joseph 
before  him,  was  supernaturally  endowed 
to  explain  these  messages  which  Go^ 
sent  to  men,  or  to  unfold  these  pr'eintima. 


B.  C.  G03.J 


C  II  A  P  T  E  R  I , 


ids 


IS  Now  at  the  end  of  the  days  that  the 
king  had  gaid  he  should  bring  them  in, 
(hen  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  brought 
Ihcni  in  before  Nebuchadnezzar. 

19  And  the  king  communed  with  them; 
and  among  them  all  was  found  none  like 

«  1  Kings  10.  1—3;  Ps.  119,  99.  b  0/. 


tions  of  coming  events.  This  was  a  kind 
of  knowledge  which  the  Chaldeans  par- 
ticularly sought,  and  on  which  they  espe- 
cially prided  themselves,  and  it  was  im- 
portant, in  order  to  "  stain  the  pride  of 
all  human  glory,"  and  to  make  "  the  wis- 
dom of  the  wise"  in  Babylon  to  be  seen 
to  bo  comparative  "  folly,"  to  endow  one 
man  from  the  land  of  the  prophets  in  the 
most  ample  manner  with  tiiis  kn>owlcdge, 
as  it  was  important  to  do  the  same  thing 
at  the  court  of  Pharaoh  by  the  superior 
endowments  of  Joseph.     Gen.  xli.  8. 

IS.  Xow  at  the  end  of  the  dai/s,  &c. 
After  three  years.  See  ver.  5.  ^  The 
jyrince  of  the  eunuchu  hroufjht  them  in. 
Daniel,  his  three  friends,  and  the  others 
■who  had  been  selected  and  trained  for  the 
same  purpose. 

19.  And  the  king  communed  with  them. 
Heb.  'spake  with  them.'  Probably  he 
conversed  with  them  on  the  points  which 
had  constituted  the  principal  subjects  of 
their  studies ;  or  he  examined  them.  It 
is  easy  to  imagine  that  this  must  have 
been  to  these  young  men  a  severe  ordeal. 
^  And  among  them  all  was  found  none 
like  Daniel,  <tc.  Daniel  and  his  three 
friends  had  pursued  a  course  of  strict 
temperance  ;  they  had  come  to  their  daily 
task  with  clear  heads  and  pure  hearts — 
free  from  the  oppression  and  lethai'gy  of 
surfeit,  and  the  excitement  of  wine ;  they 
had  prosecuted  their  studies  in  the  enjoy- 
ment of  fine  health,  and  with  the  buoy- 
ousness  and  elasticity  of  spirit  produced 
by  temperance,  and  they  irew  showed  thi 
result  of  such  a  course  of  training.  Young 
men  of  temperance,  other  things  being 
equal,  will  greatly  surpass  others  in  their 
preparation  for  the  duties  of  life  in  any 
profession  or  calling.  ^  Therefore  stood 
they  before  the  king.  It  is  not  said,  indeed, 
that  the  others  were  not  permitted  also 
to  stand  before  the  monarch,  but  the 
object  of  the  historian  is  to  trace  the 
moans  by  which  these  youths  rose  to  such 
eminence  and  virtue.  It  is  clear,  how- 
ever, that  whatever  may  hare  been  the 
result  on  the  others,  the  historian  means 
to   say   that   these  young    meo    rose   to 


Daniel,  Ilananiah,  Mishael,  and  Azariah: 
therefore  stood  they  before  the  king. 

20  And  ain  all  matters  of  wisdom  ^and 
understanding,  that  the  king  inquired  of 
them,  he  found  them  ten  times  better  than 
all  the  magicians  and  astrologers  that  were 
in  all  his  realm. 


higher  eminence  than  they  did,  and  were 
permitted  to  stand  nearer  the  throne. 
The  phrase  "  stood  before  the  king,"  is 
one  which  denotes  elevated  rank.  They 
were  employed  in  honourable  olEccs  at 
the  court,  and  received  peculiar  marks  of 
the  royal  favour. 

20.  And  in  all  matters  of  icisdom  and 
understanding.  Marg. 'o/.'  The  Hebrew 
is,  'Everything  of  wisdom  of  understand- 
ing.' The  Greek,  '  In  all  things  of  wis- 
dom and  knowledge.'  The  meaning  is, 
in  everything  which  required  peculiai 
wisdom  to  understand  and  explain  it.  Tho 
points  submitted  were  such  as  would  ap- 
propriately come  before  the  minds  of  the 
sages  and  magicians  who  were  employed 
as  counsellors  at  court.  If  lie  found  them 
ten.  times  better.  Better  counsellors ;  bet- 
ter informed.  Heb.  '  ton  hands  above 
the  magicians ;'  that  is,  ten  times,  or 
many  times.  In  this  sense  the  word  ten 
is  used  in  Gen.  xxxi.  7.  41 ;  Num.  xiv. 
22 ;  Neh.  iv.  12  ;  Job  xix.  3.  They  greatly- 
surpassed  them.  %  Than  all  the  magi- 
cians. Gr.  Toiii  izaoiiov;.  The  Greek 
word  means  those  singing  to  ;  then  those 
who  propose  to  heal  the  sick  by  singing; 
then  those  who  practice  magical  arts  or 
incantations — particularly  with  the  idea  of 
charming  with  songs;  and  then  those  who 
accomplish  anything  surpassing  human 
power  by  mysterious  and  supernatur.il 
means.  Passow.  The  Hebrew  word 
a'P^"}!! — Jihartiimmim — occurs  only  in  the 
following  places  in  the  Scriptures,  in  all 
of  which  it  is  rendered  magicians,  Gen. 
xli.  8,  24;  Ex.  vii.  11,  22,  vii.  7  (3),  18  (U), 
19  (15),  ix.  11;  Dan.  i.  22,  ii.  2.  From 
this  it  appears  that  it  applied  only  to  tho 
magicians  in  Egypt  and  in  Babylon,  and 
doubtless  substantially  the  same  class  of 
persons  is  referred  to.  It  is  found  only 
in  the  plural  number,  ^jci-Zm^M  implying 
that  they  formed  companies,  or  that  they 
jvere  always  associated  together,  so  that 
different  persons  performed  different  parts 
in  their  incantations.  The  word  is  defined 
by  Gesenius  to  mean,  "  Sacred  scribes, 
skilled   in  the  sacred  writings  or  hiero- 


104 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  603 


glypliics — UpoyjinnpiaitXi — a  class  of  Egyp- 
tian priests."  It  is,  according  to  him 
^Lex.),  of  Hebrew  origiu,  and  is  derived 
fromiS^rij  hhcrct,  sti/liis — an  instrument 
of  'writing,  and  B  —  formative.  It  is  not 
improbable,  he  suggests,  that  the  He- 
brews with  these  letters  imitated  a  similar 
Egyptian  word.  Prof.  Stuart  (in  loc.) 
says  that  the  word  would  be  correctly 
translated  jjoi-jhch,  and  supposes  that  it 
originally  referred  to  those  who  were 
"  busied  with  books  and  writing,  and 
skilled  in  them."  It  is  evident  that  the 
word  is  not  of  Persian  origin,  since  it 
was  used  in  Egypt  long  before  it  occurs 
in  Daniel.  A  full  and  very  interesting 
account  of  the  Magians  and  their  reli- 
gion may  be  found  in  Crcuzer,  MytlioIo<jie 
tiiid  SijmboUlc,  i.  pp.  1S7-234.  Herodotus 
mentions  the  Blarji  as  a  distinct  people. 
i.  101.  The  word  3I(ig  or  3Iofj  (whence 
the  nayoi  —  magoi  —  of  the  Greeks,  and 
the  magi  of  the  Romans),  means  properly 
a  j)i'icst ;  and  at  a  very  early  period  the 
names  Chaldeans  and  Magi  were  inter- 
changeable, and  both  were  regarded  as  of 
the  same  class.  Creuzer,  i.  187,  note. 
They  were  doubtless,  at  first,  a  class  of 
priests  among  the  Medes  and  Persians, 
who  were  employed,  among  other  things, 
in  the  search  for  wisdom;  who  were  con- 
nected with  heathen  oracles  ;  who  claimed 
acquaintance  with  the  will  of  the  gods, 
and  who  professed  to  have  the  power, 
therefore,  of  making  known  future  events, 
by  explaining  dreams,  visions,  preter- 
natural appearances,  &c.  The  Magi  form- 
ed one  of  the  six  tribes  into  which  the 
Medes  were  formerly  divided  (Herodotus, 
i.  101),  but  on  the  downfall  of  the  Median 
empire,  they  continued  to  retain  at  the 
court  of  the  conqueror  a  great  degree  of 
power  and  authority.  '•  The  learning  of 
the  Magi  was  connected  with  astrology 
and  enchantment,  in  which  they  were  so 
celebrated  that  their  name  was  applied 
to  all  orders  of  magicians  and  enchanters." 
Anthon,  Class.  Die.  These  remarks  may 
explain  the  reason  why  the  word  magician 
comes  to  be  applied  to  this  class  of  men, 
though  we  are  not  to  suppose  that  the 
persons  referred  to  in  Genesis  and  Ex- 
odus, under  the  appellation  of  the  Hebrew 
name  there  given  to  them  (n'CB"ri)j  or 
those  found  in  Babylon,  referred  to  in  the 
passage  before  us,  to  whom  the  same 
name  is  applied,  were  of  that  class  of 
priests.     The    name    magi,  or    magician, 


was  so  extended  as  to  embrace  all  win 
made  pretensions  to  the  kind  of  know- 
ledge for  which  the  magi  were  distinguish, 
ed,  and  hence  came  also  to  be  synonymous 
with  the  Clialdeans,  who  were  also  cele- 
brated for  this.  Comp.  Is^otes  on  ch.  ii.  2. 
In  the  passage  before  us,  it  cannot  be 
determined  with  certainty  that  the  per- 
sons were  of  Magian  origin,  though  it  is 
possible,  as  in  ch.  ii.  2,  they  are  dis- 
tinguished from  the  Chaldeans.  All  that 
is  certainly  meant  is,  that  thej'  were  per- 
sons who  laid  claim  to  the  power  of 
diving  into  future  events;  of  explaining 
mysteries ;  of  interpreting  dreams  ;  of 
working  by  enchantments,  <tc.  ^  And 
astrologers.  O'cyNn.  This  word  is  ren- 
dered by  the  LXX,  nayovi — magians.  So, 
also,  in  the  Vulgate — magns.  The  English 
word  astrologer  denotes  "  one  who  pro- 
fesses to  foretell  futm-e  events  by  the 
aspects  and  situation  of  the  stars."  Web- 
ster. The  Hebrew  word  —  a''flU'X  —  ac- 
cording to  Gesenius,  means  enchanters, 
magicians.  It  is  derived,  probably,  from 
the  obsolete  root  ']^'i< ,  to  cover,  to  con- 
ceal, and  refers  to  those  who  were  de- 
voted to  the  practice  of  occult  arts,  and  to 
the  cultivation  of  recondite  and  cabalistic 
sciences.  It  is  supposed  by  some  philo- 
logists to  have  given  rise,  by  dropping  the 
initial  n,  to  the  Greek  ao^pos,  wise,  wise 
man,  and  the  Persian  Sophi,  an  epithet 
of  equivalent  import.  See  Gesenius  on 
the  word,  and  comp.  Bush  on  Dan.  ii.  2. 
The  word  is  found  only  in  Daniel,  ch.  i. 
20,  ii.  2,  10,  27,  iv.  7  (4),  v.  7, 11,  15,  in 
every  instance  rendered  astrologer,  and 
astrologers.  There  is  no  evidence,  how- 
ever, that  the  science  of  astrology  enters 
into  the  meaning  of  the  word,  or  that 
the  persons  referred  to  attempted  to 
practice  divination  by  the  aid  of  the 
stars.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  term 
astrologer  should  have  been  employed  in 
our  translation,  as  it  conveys  an  intima- 
tion which  is  not  found  in  the  original. 
It  is,  indeed,  in  the  highest  degree  pro- 
bable, that  a  part  of  their  pretended  wis- 
dom consisted  in  their  ability  to  cast  the 
fates  of  men  by  the  conjunctions  and  op- 
position of  the  stars,  but  this  is  not  necev 
sarily  implied  in  the  word.  Prof.  Stuart 
renders  it  inchanters.  •[/»  all  his  realm 
Not  only  in  the  capital,  but  throughout 
the  kingdom.  These  arts  were  doubt- 
less practised  extensively  elsewhere,  but 
it    is    probable    that     the    most    skilful 


B.C.  603.] 


CHAPTER 


105 


21  And   Daniel  continued  ^  even 

=1  Ch.  6.  28,  10. 1.    Ho  lived  to  see  that  glo- 
rious time  of  the  return  of  his  people  from  the 


in    them    would    be    assembled    at    tlie 
capital. 

21.  And  Daniel  continued  even  vnio 
the  first  year  of  Icing  Cyrus.  When  the 
proclamation  was  issued  by  him  to  re- 
build the  temple  at  Jerusalem.  Ezra.  i.  1. 
That  is,  he  continued  in  influence  and 
authority,  at  difi'erent  times,  during  that 
period,  and,  of  course,  during  the  whole 
of  the  seventy  year's  captivity.  It  is  not 
necessarily  implied  that  he  did  not  lice 
longer,  or  even  that  he  ceased  then  to 
have  influence  and  authority  at  court,  but 
the  object  of  the  writer  is  to  show  tiiat, 


unto  tlie  first  year  of  king  Cyrus. 

Babylonian  captivity,  thousli  he  did  not  die 
then.     So  till  is  used.     I's.  110.  1,  WZ.  S. 


during  that  long  and  eventful  period,  be 
occupied  a  station  of  influence,  until  the 
captivity  was  accomplished,  and  the  royal 
order  was  issued  for  rebuilding  the  tem- 
ple, lie  was  among  the  first  of  the  cap- 
tives that  were  taken  to  Babylon,  and  he 
lived  to  see  the  end  of  the  captivity — "  the 
joyful  day  of  Jewish  freedom."  Prof. 
Stuart.  It  is  commonly  believed  that 
when  the  captives  returned,  he  remained 
in  Chaldea,  probably  detained  by  his  high 
employments  in  the  Persian  empire,  and 
that  he  died  either  at  Babylon  or  at 
Shusan.     Comp.  the  Intro.  ^  1. 


PKACTICAL    KEMARKS. 

In  view  of  the  exposition  given  of  this  chapter,  the  following  remarks  may  be  made : — 
(1.)  There  is  in  every  period  of  the  world,  and  in  every  place,  much  obscure  and  buried  talent 
that  might  be  rultivatod  and  brought  to  light,  as  there  are  many  gems  in  earth  and  ocean 
that  are  yet  undiscovered.  Notes  on  vs.  1—1.  Among  these  captive  youths — prisoners  of  war — 
in  a  foreign  land,  and  as  yet  unknown,  there  was  most  rich  and  varied  talent — talent  that  was 
destined  yet  to  shine  at  the  court  of  the  most  magnificent  monarchy  of  the  ancient  world,  and 
to  be  honoured  as  among  the  brightest  that  the  world  has  seen.  And  so  in  all  places,  and  at  all 
times,  there  is  much  rich  and  varied  genius,  which  might  sliiue  with  great  brilliancy,  and  per- 
form important  public  services,  if  it  were  cultivated,  and  allowed  to  develop  itself  on  the  great 
theatre  of  human  afi'airs.  Thus  in  obscure  rural  retreats  there  may  be  bright  gems  of  intellect ; 
in  the  low  haunts  of  vice  there  may  be  talent  that  would  charm  the  world  by  the  beauty  of 
Bong,  or  the  power  of  eloquence;  among  slaves  there  may  be  mind  which,  if  emancipated,  would 
take  its  place  in  the  brightest  constellations  of  genius.  The  great  endowments  of  Moses  as  a 
lawgiver,  a  prophet,  a  profound  statesman,  sprang  from  an  enslaved  people,  as  those  of  Daniel 
did ;  and  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  the  brightest  talent  of  the  earth  has  been  found  in  placeu 
of  great  obscurity,  and  where,  but  for  some  remarkable  disjicnsation  of  Providence,  it  migl>4 
have  remained  for  over  unknown.    This  thought  has  been  immortalized  by  Gray : — 

"  Full  many  a  gem  of  i,"urest  ray  .«!ercne, 

The  dark  unfathomed  caves  of  ocean  bear; 

Full  many  a  flower  is  boru  to  blush  unseen, 

Aud  waste  its  sweetness  on  the  desert  air. 

"Some  village  Hampden  that  with  dauntless  breast 
The  little  tyrant  of  the  fields  with.stood  ; 
Some  mute  inglorious  Milton  here  may  rest; 
Some  Cromwell  guiltless  of  his  country's  blood." 

There  is  at  any  time  on  the  earth  talent  enough  created  for  all  that  there  is  to  be  done  in  any 
generation;  and  ther"  i's  ?Jways  enough  for  talent  to  accomplish  if  it  were  employed  in  the  pur^ 
poses  for  which  it  was  oiioinally  adapted.  There  need  be  at  no  time  any  wasted  or  unoccu))ie<d 
mind;  and  there  need  be  no  great  and  good  plan  that  should  fail  for  the  want  of  talent  fitted  to 
accomplish  it  if  tha-t  which  actually  exists  on  the  earth  were  called  into  action. 

(2.)  He  docs  a  great  service  to  the  world  who  seeks  out  such  talent,  and  gives  it  an  oppor- 
tunity to  accomplish  what  it  is  fitted  to,  by  furnishing  it  the  means  of  an  education.  Ver.  3. 
Nebuchadnezzar  unconsciously,  and  doubtless  undesignedly,  did  a  great  service  to  mankind  by 
his  purpose  to  seek  out  the  talent  of  the  Hebrew  captives,  and  giving  it  an  opportunity  to  ex- 
pand, and  to  ripen  into  usefulness.  Daniel  has  taken  his  place  among  the  proidiets  and  states- 
men of  the  world  as  a  man  of  rare  endowments,  and  of  equally  rare  integrity  of  character.  He 
has,  xinder  the  leading  of  the  divine  Spirit,  done  more  than  most  other  prophets  to  lift  the  mys- 
terious veil  which  shrouds  the  future;  more  than  could  have  been  done  by  the  penetrating 
sagacity  of  all  the  Burkes,  the  Cannings,  and  the  Mettcrnichs  of  the  world.  So  far  as  human 
appearances  go,  all  this  might  have  remained  in  obscurity,  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  pur- 
pose of  the  Chaldean  monarch  to  bring  forward  into  public  notice  the  obscure  talent  which  lay 
biJ  among  the  Hebrew  captives.  He  always  does  a  good  service  to  mankind  who  seeks  out 
Drj^ht  and  promising  genius,  and  who  gives  it  the  opportunity  of  developing  itself  with  ad 
tantsge  on  the  great  theatre  of  human  affairs. 


106  r>  A  N  I E  L.  [B.  C.  603. 

(3.)  We  cannot  but  admire  the  arrangements  of  ProTidcnce  by  -Nbich  this  was  done.  Note! 
on  vs.  1-4.  Tliis  occurred  in  connection  with  the  remarkable  ptirpofe  of  a  heathen  monarch — a 
man  who,  perhap.'  more  than  any  other  heathen  ruler,  has  furnished  an  illustration  of  tha 
truth  that  "  the  king's  heart  is  in  the  hand  of  the  Lord."  That  purpose  was,  to  raise  to  emi- 
nence and  influence  the  talent  that  mifiht  he  found  among  the  Hebrew  captives.  There  can  be 
no  doubt  that  the  hand  of  God  was  in  this ;  that  there  was  a  secret  divine  influence  on  his 
mind,  unknown  to  him.  which  secured  this  result ;  and  that  while  he  was  aiming  at  one  result, 
God  was  designing  to  secure  another.  There  was  thus  a  douWe  influence  on  his  mind  :  (1.)  that 
which  arose  from  the  purpose  of  tlie  monarch  himself,  originated  by  considerations  of  policy,  or 
contemplating  the  aggrandizement  and  increased  splendour  of  his  court;  and  (2.)  the  secret 
and  silent  influence  of  God,  shaping  the  plans  of  the  monarch  to  the  ends  which  He  had  in  view. 
Comp.  Notes  on  Isa.  x.  5,  seq. 

(4.)  As  it  is  reasonable  to  suppo.-Je  that  these  young  men  had  been  trained  xip  in  the 
strict  principles  of  religion  and  temperance  (vs.  8-12),  the  case  before  us  furnishes  an 
interesting  illustration  of  the  temptations  to  which  those  who  are  early  trained  in  the 
ways  of  piety  are  often  exposed.  Every  effort  seems  to  have  been  made  to  induce  them  to 
abandon  the  principles  in  which  they  had  been  educated,  and  there  was  a  strong  proba- 
bility that  tho.<e  efforts  would  be  successful,  (a)  They  were  among  strangers,  far  away  from 
the  homes  of  their  youth,  and  surrounded  by  the  allurements  of  a  great  city,  {b)  Everything 
was  done  which  could  be  done  to  induce  them  io  forget  their  own  land,  and  the  religion  of  their 
fathers,  (c)  They  were  suddenly  brought  into  distinguished  notice;  they  attracted  the  atten- 
tion of  the  great,  and  had  the  prospect  of  associating  with  princes  and  nobles  in  the  most  mag- 
nificent court  on  earth.  They  had  been  selected  on  account  of  their  personal  beauty  and  theiJ 
intellectual  promise,  and  were  approached,  therefore,  in  a  form  of  temptation  to  which  youths 
are  commonly  most  sensitive,  and  to  wliich  they  are  commonly  most  liable  to  yield,  (rf)  They 
were  far  away  from  the  religious  institutions  of  their  country;  from  the  public  services  of  the 
sanctuary ;  from  the  temple ;  and  from  all  tliose  influences  which  had  been  made  to  bear  upon 
them  in  early  life.  It  was  a  rare  virtue  which  could,  in  these  circumstances,  withstand  the 
power  of  such  temptations. 

(5.)  Young  men,  trained  in  the  ways  of  religion,  and  in  the  habits  of  temperance,  are  often 
now  exposed  to  similar  temptations.  They  visit  the  cities  of  a  foreign  country,  or  the  cities  in 
their  own  land.  They  are  surrounded  by  strangers.  They  are  far  away  from  the  sanctuary  to 
which  in  early  life  they  were  conducted  by  their  parents,  and  in  which  they  were  taught  tho 
truths  of  religion.  The  eye  of  that  unslumbering  vigilance  which  was  upon  them  in  their  own 
hmd,  or  in  the  country  neighbourhood  where  their  conduct  was  known  to  all,  is  now  withdrawn, 
No  one  will  know  it  if  they  visit  the  theatre ;  no  one  will  see  tlicm  who  will  make  report  if  they 
are  found  in  the  gambling-room,  or  the  place  of  dissipation.  In  those  new  scenes,  new  temp- 
tations are  around  them.  They  may  be  noticed,  flattered,  caressed.  They  may  be  invited  to 
places  by  the  refined  and  the  fashionable,  from  which,  when  at  home,  they  would  have  recoiled. 
Or  it  may  be,  prospects  of  honour  and  affluence  may  open  upon  them,  and  in  the  whirl  of 
business  or  pleasure,  they  may  be  under  the  strongest  temptations  to  forget  the  les.=ons  of  early 
virtue,  and  to  abandon  the  principles  of  tlie  religion  in  which  they  were  trained.  Tliousands  of 
young  men  are  ruined  in  circumstances  similar  to  those  in  which  these  youths  were  placed  ia 
Babylon,  and  amidst  temptations  mucli  less  formidable  than  tliose  which  encompassed  them ;  and 
it  is  a  rare  virtue  which  makes  a  young  man  safe  amidst  the  temptations  to  which  he  is  ex- 
posed in  a  great  city,  or  in  a  distant  land. 

(6.)  We  have  in  this  chapter  an  instructive  instance  of  tho  value  of  early  training  in  the  prin- 
ciples of  religion  and  temperance.  There  can  be  no  doubt  tht':  these  young  men  owed  theii 
safety  and  their  future  success  wholly  to  this.  Parents,  thei  ifore,  should  be  encouraged  to 
train  their  sons  in  the  strictest  principles  of  religion  and  virtue.  Seed  thus  sown  will  not  be 
lost.  In  a  distant  land;  far  away  from  home,  from  a  parent's  eye,  from  the  sanctuary  of  God; 
in  the  midst  of  temptation.^,  when  surrounded  by  flatterers,  by  the  gay  and  by  the  irreligious, 
such  principles  will  be  a  safeguard  to  them  which  nothing  else  can  secure,  and  will  save  them 
when  otherwise  they  would  be  engulphed  in  the  vortex  of  irreligion  and  dissipation.  The  best 
service  which  a  parent  can  render  to  a  son,  is  to  imbue  his  mind  thoroughly  with  the  princi- 
ples of  temperance  and  religion. 

(7.)  Vi'v  may  see  th  >  value  of  a  purpose  of  entire  abstinence  from  the  use  of  wine.  Vcr.  8. 
Daniel  resolved  that  he  would  not  make  use  of  it  as  a  beverage.  His  purpose,  it  would  seem, 
was  decided,  though  he  meant  to  accomplish  it  by  mild  and  persuasive  means  if  possible.  There 
were  good  reasons  for  the  formation  of  such  a  purpose  then,  and  those  reasons  are  not  less 
weighty  now.  He  never  had  occasion  to  regret  the  formation  of  such  a  purpose;  nor  has  any 
one  who  has  formed  a  similar  resolution  ever  had  occasion  to  regret  it.  Among  the  reasons  for 
the  formation  of  sucli  a  resolution,  the  following  may  be  suggested:  (1.)  A  fixed  resolution  in 
regard  to  the  course  which  one  will  pursue;  to  the  kind  of  life  which  he  will  live;  to  the  prin- 
ciples on  which  he  will  act,  is  of  inestimable  value  in  a  young  man.  Our  confidence  in  a  man  is 
just  in  proportion  as  we  have  evidence  that  ho  has  formed  a  steady  purpose  of  virtue,  and  that 
he  has  sutficient  strengtli  of  resolution  to  keep  it.  (2.)  Tho  same  rea.sons  exist  for  adopting  a 
resolution  of  abstinence  in  regard  to  the  use  of  wine,  which  exist  for  adopting  it  in  relation  to 
the  use  of  ardent  spirits ;  for  (a)  The  intoxicating  principle  in  wine  or  other  lirmented  liquors  is 
precisely  the  same  as  in  ardent  spirits.  It  is  the  result  of  fermentation,  not  of  distillalinn,  and 
undergoes  no  change  by  distillation.  The  only  effect  of  that  chemical  process,  is  to  drive  it  off 
y  heat,  condense,  and  collect  it  in  a  form  better  adapted  to  commerc«  c  to  preservation,  but 


B.(L603.]  CHAPTER   I.  lOT 

tho  ulcoholic  principle  is  precisely  the  same  in  wine  as  in  distilled  liquors.  (6)  Inl,»xl«ition 
itself  is  the  same  thing,  whether  prcxluced  liy  fermentoil  liquors  or  by  distilled  spirits.  It  pro- 
duces the  same  eflfect  on  the  body,  on  the  mind,  on  the  afToctions.  A  man  who  becomes  intoxi. 
eated  on  wine — as  ho  easily  may — is  in  precisely  the  same  condition,  so  far  as  intoxication  jj 
produced,  as  he  who  becomes  intoxicated  on  distilled  liquors,  (c)  There  is  the  same  kind  of 
danger  of  becoming  intemperate  in  the  use  of  the  one  as  of  the  other.  The  man  who  habitu- 
ally uses  wine  is  as  certainly  in  danger  of  becoming  a  drunkard,  as  he  who  indulges  in  the 
use  of  distilled  liquors.  The  danger,  too,  arises  from  the  same  source.  It  arises  from  the  fact 
that  he  who  indulges  once  will  feel  induced  to  indulge  again ;  that  a  strong  and  peculiar 
craving  is  produced  for  stimulating  liquors;  that  the  body  ia  left  in  such  a  state  that  it 
demands  a  repetition  of  the  stimulus;  that  it  is  a  law  in  regard  to  indulgence  in  this  kind 
of  drinks,  that  au  increased  quantity  is  demanded  to  meet  the  exhausted  state  of  the  system- 
and  that  the  demand  goes  on  in  this  increased  ratio  until  there  is  no  power  of  control,  and 
the  man  becomes  a  confirmed  inebriate.  All  these  laws  operate  in  regard  to  the  use  of  -n-ino 
as  really  as  to  the  use  of  any  other  intoxicating  drinks ;  and,  tlierefore,  there  is  the  same  reason 
for  the  adoption  of  a  resolution  to  abstain  from  all  alike,  {d}  The  temptations  arc  often  greattr 
in  relation  to  wine  than  to  any  other  kind  of  intoxicating  drinks.  There  is  a  large  class  of  persons 
in  tho  community  who  are  in  comparatively  little  danger  of  becoming  intemperate  from  any 
other  cause  than  this.  This  remark  applies  particularly  to  young  men  of  wealth  ;  to  those  who 
move  in  the  more  elevated  circles;  to  those  who  are  in  college,  and  to  those  who  are  preparing 
for  the  learned  professions.  They  are  in  peculiar  danger  from  this  quarter,  because  it  is  re- 
garded as  genteel  to  drink  a  glass  of  wine;  because  they  ore  allured  by  the  example  of  professed 
Christians,  of  ministers  of  the  gospel,  and  of  ladies ;  and  because  they  are  often  in  circumstances 
in  which  it  would  not  be  regarded  as  respectable  or  respectful  to  decline  it.  (.3.)  A  third 
reason  for  adopting  such  a  resolution  is,  that  it  is  the  only  security  that  any  one  can  have  that 
he  will  not  become  a  drunkard.  No  one  who  indulges  at  all  in  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors, 
can  have  any  certainty  that  he  will  not  yet  become  a  conlirmed  inebriate.  Of  the  great  mul- 
titudes who  have  been,  and  who  are  drunkards,  there  are  almost  none  who  meant  to  sink 
themselves  to  that  wretched  condition.  They  have  become  intemperate  by  indulging  in  the 
social  glass  when  they  thought  themselves  safe,  and  they  continued  the  indulgence  until 
it  was  too  late  to  recover  themselves  from  ruin.  lie  who  is  in  the  habit  of  drinking  at  all 
can  have  no  security  that  he  may  not  yet  be  all  that  the  poor  drunkard  now  is.  But 
he  will  be  certainly  safe  from  this  evil  if  he  adopts  the  purpose  of  total  abstinence,  and  stead- 
fastly adheres  to  it.  AVhatever  other  dangers  await  him,  he  will  be  secure  against  this- 
whatever  other  calamities  he  may  experience,  he  is  sure  that  he  will  escape  all  those  that 
are  caused  by  intemperance. 

(8.)  AVe  have  in  this  chapter  a  most  interesting  illustration  of  the  value  of  temperance 
in  eating,  vs.  9-17.  There  are  laws  of  our  nature  relating  to  the  quantity  and  quality 
of  food,  which  can  no  more  be  violated  with  impunity  than  any  other  of  the  laws  of  God ; 
and  j-et  those  laws  are  probably  more  frequently  violated  than  any  other.  There  are  mors 
persons  intemperate  in  the  use  of  food  than  in  the  use  of  drink,  and  probably  more  diseaiies 
engendered,  and  more  lives  cut  short,  by  improper  indulgence  in  eating  than  in  drinking. 
At  the  same  time  it  is  a  more  base,  low,  gross,  and  beastly  passion.  A  drunkard  is  very 
often  the  wreck  of  a  generous  and  noble-minded  nature.  lie  was  large-hearted,  open,  free 
liberal,  and  others  took  advantage  of  his  generosity  of  disposition,  and  led  him  on  to  habits 
of  intoxication.  But  there  is  nothing  noble  or  generous  in  the  gourmand.  lie  approximates 
more  nearly  to  the  lowest  forms  of  the  brutal  creation  than  any  other  human  being;  and  if 
there  is  any  man  who  should  be  looked  on  with  feelings  of  unutterable  loathing,  it  is  he  who 
wastes  his  vigour,  and  destroys  his  health,  by  gross  indulgence  in  eating.  There  is  almost  no 
sin  that  God  speaks  of  in  tones  of  more  decided  abhorrence  than  the  sin  of  gluttony.  Comp. 
Deut.  xxi.  20,  21;  Ps.  cxli.4;  Prov.  xx\ii.  1,  2,  3,  20,  21;  Luke  xvi.  19,  xxi.  34. 

(9.)  We  have,  in  the  close  of  the  chapter  before  us,  a  most  interesting  illustration  of  the 
effect  of  an  early  course  of  strict  temperance  on  the  future  character  and  success  in  life, 
Ts.  17-21.  The  trial  in  the  case  of  these  young  men  was  fairly  made.  It  was  continued 
through  three  years ;  a  period  long  enough  for  a  fair  trial ;  a  period  long  enough  to  make  it 
an  interesting  example  to  young  men  who  are  pursuing  a  course  of  literary  studies,  who  are 
preparing  to  enter  one  of  the  learned  professions,  or  who  are  qualifying  themselves  for  a  life 
of  mechanical  or  agricultural  pursuits.  In  the  case  of  these  young  men,  they  were  strictly 
on  probation,  and  the  result  of  their  probation  was  seen  in  the  success  which  attended  them 
when  they  passed  the  severe  examination  before  the  monarch  (ver.  19),  and  in  the  honours 
which  they  reached  at  his  court,  vs.  19-21.  To  make  this  case  applicable  to  other  young  men, 
and  useful  to  them,  we  may  notice  two  things:  the  fact  that  every  young  man  is  on  pro- 
bation; and  the  effect  of  an  early  course  of  temperance  in  securing  the  object  of  that  pro- 
bation. 

(a)  Every  young  man  is  on  probation ;  that  is,  his  future  character  and  success  are  t6  be 
determined  by  what  he  is  when  a  youth.  (1.)  All  the  great  interests  of  the  world  are  soon  to 
pass  into  the  hands  of  the  young.  They  who  now  possess  the  property,  and  fill  the  offices  of 
the  land,  will  pass  away.  Whatever  there  is  that  is  valuable  in  liberty,  science,  art,  or  religion, 
will  pass  into  the  hands  of  those  who  are  now  young.  They  will  preside  in  the  seminaries  of 
learning;  will  sit  down  on  the  benches  of  justice;  will  take  the  vacated  seats  of  senators;  will 
occupy  the  pulpits  in  the  churches;  will  be  entrusted  with  all  the  offices  of  honour  and  emolu- 
luent ;  will  be  ambassadors  to  foreign  courts ;  and  will  dispense  the  charities  of  the  land,  and 


108  DANIEL.  [B.C  603 

cnrry  out  and  complete  thi  designs  of  Christian  bcncTolcnco.  There  is  not  an  interest  of  liberty, 
religion,  or  law,  -n-hich  w'll  not  soon  be  committed  to  them.  (2.)  The  -n-orld  is  farourably  dis- 
posed towards  young  men,  and  they  who  are  now  entrusted  witli  these  frreat  iutetests.  and 
who  are  soon  to  leave  thorn,  are  ready  calmly  to  commit  them  to  the  guardianship  of  the  rising 
generation,  as  soon  as  they  have  the  assurance  that  tliey  are  qualified  to  receive  tlic  trust. 
They,  therefore,  watch  with  Intense  solicitude,  the  conduct  of  those  to  whom  so  great  interests 
are  so  soon  to  be  committed.  (3.)  Early  virtue  is  indispensable  to  a  favourable  result  of  the  pro- 
bation of  young  men.  A  merchant  demands  evidence  of  integrity  and  industry  in  a  young 
man  before  he  will  admit  him  to  share  his  business,  or  will  give  him  credit;  and  the  same  thing 
is  true  respecting  a  farmer,  mechanic,  physician,  lawyer,  or  clergyman.  No  young  man  can 
hope  to  have  the  confidence  of  others,  or  to  succeed  in  his  calling,  who  does  not  give  evidence  that  he 
is  qualified  for  success  by  a  fair  probation  or  trial.  (4.)  Of  no  young  man  is  it  presumed  that  he  iii 
qualified  to  be  entrusted  with  these  great  and  momentous  interests  until  he  has  had  a  fair  trial. 
There  is  no  such  confidence  in  the  integrity  of  young  men,  or  in  their  tendencies  to  virtue,  or 
in  their  native  endowments,  that  the  world  is  willing  to  commit  great  interests  to  them  without 
an  appropriate  probation.  No  advantage  of  birth  or  blood  can  secure  this;  and  no  young  man 
should  presume  that  the  world  will  be  ready  to  confide  in  him  until  he  has  shown  that  he  ia 
qualified  for  the  station  to  which  he  aspires.  (6.)  Into  this  probation,  through  which  every 
young  man  is  passing,  the  question  of  temperance  enters  perhaps  more  deeply  than  anything 
else  respecting  character.  AVith  reference  to  his  habits  on  this  point,  every  j-oung  man  is 
watched  with  an  eagle  eye,  and  his  character  is  well  Mnderstood,  when  perhaps  he  least  sus- 
pects it.  The  public  cannot  be  deceived  on  this  point,  and  every  young  man  may  be  assured 
that  there  is  an  eye  of  unslumbering  vigilance  upon  him. 

(6)  TheeflTect  of  an  early  course  of  temper.ince  on  the  issue  of  this  probation.  This  is  seen  in 
the  avoidance  of  a  course  of  life  which  would  certainly  blast  every  hope ;  and  in  its  positive  in 
fluence  on  the  future  destiny. 

1.  The  avoidance  of  certain  things  which  would  blast  every  hope  which  a  young  man  could 
cherish.  There  are  certain  evils  which  a  young  man  will  certainly  avoid  by  a  course  of  strict 
temperance,  which  would  otherwise  certainly  come  upon  him.  They  are  such  as  these:  (a)  Po- 
verty, as  arising  from  this  .source,  lie  may,  indeed,  be  poor  if  he  is  temperate.  lie  may  lose 
his  health,  or  may  meet  with  losses,  or  way  be  unsuccessful  in  business:  but  he  is  certain  that 
he  will  never  be  made  poor  from  intemperance.  Nine-tenths  of  the  poverty  in  the  community 
is  caused  by  this  vice;  nine-tenths  of  all  who  are  in  almshouses  are  sent  there  as  the  result  of 
it,  but  from  all  this  he  will  be  certain  that  he  will  be  saved.  There  is  a  great  diff'erence,  if  a 
man  is  poor,  between  being  such  as  the  result  of  a  loss  of  health,  or  other  Providential 
dispensations,  and  being  such  as  the  result  of  intemperance,  (h)  He  will  be  saved  from 
committing  crime  from  this  cause.  About  nine-tenths  of  the  crimes  that  are  committed,  are  the 
results  of  intoxicating  drinks,  and  by  a  course  of  temperance  a  man  is  certain  that  he  will  be 
saved  from  the  commission  of  all  those  crimes.  Yet  if  not  temperate,  no  man  has  any  security 
that  he  will  not  commit  any  one  of  them.  There  is  nothing  in  himself  to  save  him  from  the 
very  worst  of  them ;  and  every  young  man  who  indulges  in  the  intoxicating  cup,  should  reflect 
that  he  has  no  security  that  he  will  not  be  led  on  to  commit  the  most  horrid  crimes  which  ever 
disgrace  humanity,  (c)  He  will  certainlj'  be  saved  from  the  drunkard's  death.  He  will  indeed 
die.  He  may  die  young;  for,  though  temperate,  he  maj'  be  cut  down  in  the  vigour  of  his  days. 
But  there  is  all  the  difference  imaginable  between  dying  as  a  drunkard,  and  dying  in  the 
ordinary  course  of  nature.  It  would  be  a  sufficient  inducement  for  any  one  to  sign  a  tem- 
perance pledge,  and  to  adhere  to  it,  if  there  were  no  other,  that  he  might  avoid  the  horrcrs  of  a 
death  by  delirium  tremens,  and  saved  from  the  loathsomeness  of  a  drunkard's  grave.  It  is 
much  for  a  young  man  to  bo  able  to  say  as  he  enters  on  life,  and  looks  out  on  the  future  with 
solicitude  as  to  what  is  to  come,  '  Whatever  may  await  me  in  the  unknown  future,  of  this  ono 
thing  I  am  certain;  I  shall  never  be  poor,  and  haggard,  and  wretched,  as  the  drunkard  is.  I 
shall  never  commit  the  crimes  to  which  drunkenness  prompts.  I  shall  never  experience  the  un- 
utterable horrors  of  delirium  tremens.  I  shall  never  die  the  death  of  unequalled  wretchedness 
caused  by  mania  a  potii.  Come  what  may,  I  see,  on  the  threshold  of  life,  that  I  am  to  be  free 
from  the  worst  evils  to  which  man  is  ever  exposed.  If  I  am  poor,  I  will  not  be  poor  as  thfl 
victim  of  intemperance  is.  If  I  die  early,  the  world  will  not  feel  that  it  is  benefitted  by  my 
removal,  and  my  friends  will  not  go  forth  to  my  grave  with  the  unutterable  anguish  which  a 
parent  has  who  follows  a  drunken  son  to  the  tomb.' 

2.  A  course  of  temperance  will  have  a  direct  and  positive  effect  on  the  issue  of  such  a  proba- 
tion. So  it  had  in  the  case  of  the  young  men  in  the  chapter  before  us:  and  so  it  will  have  in 
every  case.  Its  effect  will  be  seen  in  the  beauty,  and  healthfulness.  and  vigour  of  the  bodily 
frame;  in  the  clearness  of  the  intellect,  and  the  purity  of  the  heart;  in  habits  of  industry, 
in  general  integrity  of  life,  and  in  rendering  it  more  probable  that  the  soul  will  be  saved.  In 
no  respect  whatever,  will  a  steadfast  adhcrance  to  the  principles  of  temperance  injure  any 
young  man;  in  every  respect,  it  may  be  the  means  of  promoting  his  interests  in  the  present 
life,  and  of  securing  his  final  happiness  in  the  world  to  come.  AVhy,  then,  should  aiiy  young 
man  hesitate  about  forming  such  a  resolution  as  Daniel  did  (ver.  S),  and  about  expressing,  in 
•very  proper  way,  in  the  most  decided  manner,  his  determined  purpose  to  adhere  thrnugh  lift 
td  the  strictest  principles  of  temperance  ? 


B.C.  603.]  CHAPTER  II. 


CHAPTER  II. 

§  1.   AUTHENTICITY  OP  THE  CHAPTER. 

The  objections  to  the  authenticity  and  credibility  of  this  chapter  are  not  numerous  or  Inh 
portant. 

I.  The  first  that  is  alleged,  by  BerthoUlt  (Com.  pp.  192,  193),  is,  substantially,  this,  'that  if 
the  account  here  is  true,  the  records  of  ancient  times  could  not  exhibit  a  more  finished  tyrant 
than  Nebuchadnezzar  was,  if  he  doomed  so  many  persons  to  death  on  so  slight  ind  foolish  an 
occasion,  ver.  5.  This  cruelty,  it  is  said,  i.s  wholly  contrary  to  the  general  character  cf  Nebuchad- 
nezzar as  it  is  reported  to  us,  and  wholly  incredible.  It  is  further  said  that,  though  it  was 
common  in  the  East  to  trust  in  dreams,  and  though  the  office  of  interpreting  them  was  an 
honourable  office,  yet  no  one  was  so  unreasonable,  or  could  bo,  as  to  require  the  interpreter  to 
reveal  the  dream  itself  when  it  was  forgotten.  The  proper  office  of  the  interpreter,  it  is  said, 
■was  to  interpret  the  dream,  not  to  tell  what  the  dream  was.' 

To  this  objection,  which  seems  to  haye  considerable  plausibility,  it  may  be  replied  : — 

(1.)  Much  reliance  was  placed  on  dreams  in  ancient  times,  alike  among  the  Hebrews  and  in 
the  heathen  world.  The  case  of  Pharaoh  will  at  once  occur  to  the  mind ;  and  it  need  not  be 
Baid  that  men  everywhere  relied  on  dreams,  and  inquired  earnestly  respecting  them,  whether 
they  mi/jht  not  be  llie  appointed  means  of  communication  with  the  spiritual  world,  and  of 
disclosing  what  was  to  occur  in  the  future.  There  cau  be  no  objection,  therefore,  to  the 
supposition  that  this  heathen  monarch,  Nebuchadnezzar,  felt  all  the  solicitude  which  he  is 
reported  to  have  done  respecting  the  dream  which  he  had.  It  may  be  further  added,  that 
in  the  dream  itself  there  is  nothing  improbable  as  a  dream,  for  it  has  all  the  charac- 
teristics of  those  mysterious  operations  of  the  mind;  and,  if  God  ever  communicated  his 
will  by  a  dream,  or  made  known  future  events  in  this  way,  there  is  no  absurdity  in  supposing 
that  he  would  tlius  communicate  what  was  to  come,  to  him  who  was  at  that  time  at  the  head 
of  the  empires  of  the  earth,  and  who  was  the  king  over  the  first  of  those  kingdoms  which  were 
to  embrace  the  world's  history  for  so  many  ages. 

(2.)  There  is  no  improbability  in  supposing  that  a  dream  would  vanish  from  the  distinct  re- 
collection, or  that  if  it  had  vanished,  the  mind  would  be  troubled  by  some  vague  recollection 
or  impression  in  regard  to  it.  This  often  occurs  in  our  dreams  now,  as  in  the  indistinct  recol- 
lection that  we  have  had  a  pleasant  or  a  frightful  dream,  when  we  are  wholly  unable  to  recall 
the  dream  itself  This  often  occurs,  too,  when  we  would  be  f/lacl  to  recover  the  dream  if  wa 
could,  but  when  no  effort  that  we  can  make  will  recall  its  distinct  features  to  our  minds. 

(3.)  There  was,  really,  nothing  that  was  unreasonable,  absurd,  or  tyrannical,  in  the  demand 
■which  Nebuchadnezzar  made  on  the  astrologers,  that  they  should  recall  the  dream  itself,  and 
then  interpret  it.  Doubtless  he  could  recollect  it  if  they  would  suggest  it,  or  at  least  he  could 
60  far  recollect  it  as  to  prevent  their  imposing  on  him ;  for  something  like  this  constantly  occurs 
in  the  operation  of  our  own  minds.  AVhen  we  have  forgotten  a  storj-,  or  a  piece  of  history, 
though  we  could  not  ourselves  recall  it,  yet  when  it  is  repeated  to  us,  we  can  then  distinctly 
recollect  it,  and  can  perceive  that  that  is  the  same  narrative,  for  it  agrees  with  all  our  impres- 
Bions  in  regard  to  it.  Furthermore,  though  it  was  not  understood  to  be  a  part  of  the  office  of 
an  interpreter  of  dreams  to  recall  the  dream  if  it  had  vanished  from  the  mind,  yet  Nebuchad- 
nezzar reasoned  correctly,  that  if  they  could  interpret  the  dream  they  ought  to  be  presumed  to 
be  able  to  tell  what  it  was.  The  one  required  no  more  sagacity  than  the  other;  and  if  they 
■were,  as  they  pretended  to  be.  under  the  inspiration  of  the  gods  in  interpreting  a  dream,  it  was 
fair  to  presume  that,  under  the  same  in^^  'ration,  they  could  tell  what  it  was.  Comp.  Notes  on 
ver.  5.  No  objection,  then,  can  lie  against  the  authenticity  of  this  chapter  from  any  supposed 
absurdity  in  the  demand  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  It  was  not  only  strictly  in  accordance  with  all 
the  just  principles  of  rea.soning  in  the  case,  but  was  in  accordance  with  what  might  be  expected 
from  an  arbitrary  monarch  who  was  accustomed  to  exact  obedience  in  all  things. 

(4.)  What  is  here  said  of  the  threatening  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (ver.  5.)  accords  with  the  gen- 
eral traits  of  Iw  character  as  history  has  preserved  them.  lie  had  in  him  the  elements  of 
cruelty  and  severity  of  thehighestorder,  especially  when  his  will  was  not  immediately  complied 
with.  In  proof  of  this  we  need  only  refer  to  his  cruel  treatment  of  the  king  Zedekiah,  when 
Jerusalem  was  taken:  "So  they  took  the  king,  and  brought  him  to  the  king  of  Babylon,  to 
Riblah,  and  they  gave  judgment  upon  him.  And  they  slew  the  sons  of  Zedekiah  before  his 
eyes,  and  put  out  the  eyes  of  Zedekiah,  and  bound  him  with  fetters  of  brass,  and  brought  him 
to  iiabylou."  2  Kings  xxv.  6,  7  ;  comp.  also,  in  vs.  18-21  of  the  same  chapter,  the  account  of  his 
slaying  the  large  number  of  persons  that  were  taken  by  Nebuzar  adan,  captain  of  the  guard, 
and  brought  by  him  to  the  liing  in  Baliylon.  These  were  slain  in  cold  blood  by  order  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar himself.  These  facts  make  it  every  way  probable  that,  in  a  fit  of  passion,  he  would  no^ 
hesitate  to  threaten  the  astrologers  with  death  if  they  did  not  comply  at  once  with  his  will. 
Comp.  Jer.  xxxix.  0,  !<cq.,  Hi.  9-11.  The  truth  was,  that  though  Nebuchadnezzar  had  gome 
good  qualities,  and  was  religious  in  his  way,  yet  he  had  all  the  usual  characteristics  of  an 

10 


IIS>  DANIEL.  [B.C.  60o 

Oriental  despot.  He  ■was  a  man  of  strong  passions ;  and  was  a  man  whe  would  ueyer  hesitate  in 
carrying  out  the  purposes  of  an  arbitrarj',  a  determined,  and  a  stubborn  will. 

II.  A  second  objection  made  by  Bertholdt,  which  may  demand  a  moment's  notice,  is,  substan 
tially,  that  the  account  bears  the  mark  of  a  later  hand,  for  the  purpose  of  conferring  a  highe* 
honour  on  Daniel,  and  making  what  he  did  appear  the  more  wonderful.  Pp.  62,  63,  193-196 
The  supposition  of  Bertholdt  is,  that  the  original  account  was  merely  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
required  of  the  interpreter  to  explain  the  sense  of  the  dream,  but  that,  in  order  to  show  the 
greatness  of  Daniel,  the  author  of  this  book,  long  after  the  affair  occurred,  added  the  circum- 
stance that  Nebuchadnezzar  required  of  them  to  make  the  dream  knowo  as  well  as  the  inter- 
prelaiion,  and  that  the  great  superiority  of  Daniel  was  shown  by  his  being  able  at  once  to  do 
iias. 

As  this  objection,  however,  is  not  based  on  any  historic  grounds,  and  as  it  is  throughout 
mere  conjecture,  it  is  not  necessary  to  notice  it  further.  Nothing  is  gained  by  the  conjecture; 
no  difficulty  is  relieved  by  it;  nor  is  there  any  real  difficulty  to  be  relieved  by  any  such  suppo- 
sition. The  narrative,  as  we  have  it,  has,  as  we  have  seen,  no  intrinsic  improbability,  nor  is 
there  anything  in  it  which  is  contrary  to  the  well-known  character  of  Nebuchadnezzar. 

III.  A  third  objection  to  the  authenticity  of  the  chapter  which  deserves  to  be  noticed,  is 
urged  by  Liiderwald,  pp.  40,  neq.,  and  Bieek,  p.  2S0.  that  this  whole  narrative  has  a  strong  re- 
semblance to  the  account  of  the  dreams  of  Pharaoh,  and  the  promotion  of  Joseph  at  the 
court  of  Egypt,  and  was  apparently  made  up  from  that,  or  copied  from  it. 

But  to  this  we  may  reply,  (u)  That,  if  either  happened,  tJaere  is  no  more  improbability  in 
supposing  that  it  should  happen  to  Daniel  in  Babylon  than  to  Joseph  in  Egypt ;  and  taken  as 
separate  and  independent  histories  neither  of  them  is  improbable.  (6)  There  is  so  much 
diversity  in  the  two  eases  as  to  show  that  the  one  is  not  copied  from  the  other.  They  agree, 
indeed,  in  several  circumstances  : — in  the  fact  that  the  king  of  Egypt  and  the  king  of  Babylon 
had  each  a  dream ;  in  tlie  fact  that  Joseph  and  Daniel  wero  enabled  to  interpret  the  dream ; 
in  the  fact  that  they  both  ascribed  the  ability  to  do  this  not  fei  themselves  but  to  God ;  and  in 
the  fact  that  they  were  both  raised  to  honour  as  a  consequence  of  their  being  able  to  inter- 
pret the  dream.  But  in  nothing  else  do  they  agree.  The  dreams  themselves ;  the  occasion ; 
the  explanation ;  the  result;  the  bearing  on  future  events — in  these,  and  in  numerous  other 
things,  they  differ  entirely.  It  may  be  added,  also,  that  if  the  one  had  been  copied  from  the 
other,  it  is  probable  that  there  would  have  been  some  undesigned  allusion  by  which  it  could 
be  known  that  the  writer  of  the  one  had  the  other  before  him,  and  that  he  was  framing  hia 
own  narrative  from  that.  But,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  there  are  no  two  records  in  history  that 
have  more  the  marks  of  being  independent  and  original  narratives  of  real  transactions  than  the 
account  of  Joseph  in  Egypt,  and  of  Daniel  in  Babylon. 

IV.  A  fourth  objection  to  the  account  in  this  chapter,  arises  from  an  alleged  error  in  c/iro- 
nology.    For  a  consideration  of  this,  see  Notes  on  ver.  1. 


§  2.      ANALYSIS    OF   THE   CHAPTER. 

The  subjects  of  this  chapter  are  the  following: — 

I.  The  dream  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  Ver.  1.  In  accordance  with  the  common  belief  among 
the  ancients,  he  regarded  this  as  a  divine  message.  The  dream,  too,  was  of  such  a  cha- 
racter as  to  make  a  deep  unpression  on  his  mind,  though  its  distinct  features  and  details 
had  gone  from  him. 

II.  The  demand  of  Nebuchadnezzar  that  the  Cha'deans  should  recall  the  dream  to  his  recol- 
lection, and  expound  its  meaning.  Vs.  2-9.  He  ordered  those  whose  business  it  was  pro- 
fessedly to  give  such  interpretations,  to  come  into  his  presence,  and  to  make  known  the 
dream  and  its  meaning.  But  it  would  seem  that  their  pretensions  went  no  further  than  to 
explain  a  dream  when  it  was  known,  and  hence  they  asked  respectfully  that  the  king 
would  state  the  dream  in  order  that  they  might  explain  it.  The  king,  in  anger,  threat- 
ened death  if  they  did  not  first  recall  the  dream,  and  then  make  known  the  interpreta- 
tion, promising  at  the  same  time,  ample  rewards  if  they  were  able  to  do  this.  As  all  this, 
under  divine  direction,  was  designed  to  communicate  important  information  of  future 
events,  it  was  so  ordered  that  the  dream  should  be  forgotten,  thus  entirely  confounding 
the  art  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  giving  an  opportunity  to  Daniel  to  make  the  dream  and 
its  interpretation  known,  thus  exalting  a  man  from  the  land  of  the  prophets,  and  showing 
that  it  was  not  by  the  skill  of  the  pretended  interpreters  of  dreams  that  future  events 
could  be  made  known,  but  that  it  was  only  by  thoie  who  were  inspired  for  that  purpose 
by  the  true  God. 

HI.  The  acknowledged  failure  of  the  power  of  the  astrologers  and  Chaldeans.  Vs.  10,  11. 
They  admitted  that  they  could  not  do  what  was  demanded  of  them.  AVhatever  might  be 
the  conseqtience,  they  could  not  even  attempt  to  recall  a  forgotten  dream.  And  as, 
though  we  may  be  unable  to  recall  such  a  dream  distinctly  ourselves,  we  could 
ca.«ily  recognize  it  if  it  were  stated  to  us,  and  as  we  could  not  be  imposed  on  by  something 
else  that  anyone  should  undertake  to  make  us  believe  was  the  real  dream,  the  magicians 
saw  that  it  was  hopeless  to  attempt  to  palm  a  story  of  their  own  invention  on  him,  as  if 
that  were  the  real  dream,  and  they  therefore  acknowledged  tbcir  inability  to  comply  with 
the  demand  of  the  king. 


B.  C.  603.] 


CHAPTER    II. 


Ill 


rv.  The  decree  that  thoy  sbouWdie.  Vs.  12, 13.  In  this  decree,  Daniel  and  his  throe  friendi 
■who  had  been  trained  with  liim  at  court  (ch.  i.)  were  involved,  not  l)ecauso  they  had 
failed  to  comjily  with  the  demand  of  the  kin?,  for  there  is  the  fullest  evidence  that  the 
subject  had  not  been  laid  before  them,  but  because  they  came  under  the  general  class  of 
wise  men,  or  counsellors,  to  whom  the  monarch  looked  to  explain  the  prognostics  of 
coming  events. 

V.  Daniel,  when  apprised  of  the  decree,  and  the  cause  of  it,  went  to  the  king  and  requested 
a  respite  in  tlie  execution  of  the  sentence.  Vs.  14-16.  It  would  seem  that  he  had  the  privi- 
lege of  access  to  the  king  at  pleasure.  We  may  presume  that  he  stated  that  the  thing 
had  not  in  fact  been  laid  before  him,  though  he  had  become  involved  in  the  general 
sentence,  and  it  is  no  unreasonable  supposition  that  the  king  was  so  much  troubled  with 
the  dream  ;  that  he  was  so  anxious  to  know  its  signification  ;  and  that  he  saw  so  clearly  that 
if  the  decree  was  executed,  involving  Daniel  and  his  friend.s,  all  hope  of  recalling  and  un- 
derstanding it  would  be  lost,  that  be  was  ready  to  grasp  at  a??y  hope,  however  slender,  of 
being  made  acquainted  with  the  meaning  of  the  vision.  lie  was  willing,  therefore,  that 
Daniel  should  be  spared,  and  that  the  execution  of  the  decree  should  be  suspended. 

VI.  In  these  interesting  and  solemn  circumstances,  Daniel  and  his  friends  gave  them- 
selves to  prayer.  Ver.  17,  IS.  Their  lives  were  in  danger,  and  the  case  was  such  that 
they  could  not  be  rescued  but  by  a  direct  divine  interposition.  There  was  no  power  which 
they  had  of  a.scertaining  by  any  human  means  what  was  the  dream  of  the  monarch,  and  yet 
it  was  indispensable  in  order  to  save  their  lives,  that  the  dream  should  be  made  known. 
God  only,  they  knew,  could  communicate  it  to  them,  and  he  only,  therefore,  could  save 
them  from  death,  and  in  these  circumstances  of  perplexity  they  availed  themselves  of  the 
privilege  which  all  the  friends  of  God  have  — ol  carrying  their  cause  at  once  before  his 
throne. 

VII.  The  secret  was  revealed  to  Daniel  in  a  night  vision,  and  he  gave  utterance  to  an 
appropriate  song  of  praise.  Vs.  19-23.  The  occasion  was  one  wliich  demanded  such  an 
expression  of  thanksgiving,  and  that  which  Daniel  addressed  to  God  was  every  way 
worthy  of  the  occasion. 

VIII.  The  way  was  now  prepared  for  Daniel  to  make  known  to  the  king  the  dream  and  the 
interpretation.  Accordingly  he  was  brought  before  the  king,  and  he  distinctly  disclaimed 
any  power  of  himself  to  recall  the  dream,  or  to  make  known  its  signification.  Vs 
24-30. 

IX.  The  statement  of  the  dream  and  the  interpretation.     A's.  31-45. 

X.  The  effect  on  Nebuchadnezzar.  As.  46-49.  lie  recognised  the  dream;  acknowledged 
that  it  was  only  the  true  God  who  could  have  made  it  known ;  and  promoted  Daniel 
to  distinguished  honour.  In  his  own  honours,  Daniel  did  not  forget  the  virtuous  com- 
panions of  his  youth  (ch.  i.),  and  sought  for  them,  now  that  he  was  elevated,  posts  of 
honourable  employment  also.     Ver.  49. 


1  And  in  the  second  year  of  the    reign    of    Nebuchadnezzar,   Nebu- 


1.  And  in  the  second  year  of  the  reign 
of  Nebuchadnezzar.  There  is  an  appa- 
rent chronological  difficulty  in  this  state- 
ment, which  has  given  some  perplexity  to 
expositors.  It  arises  mainly  from  two 
sources.  (1.)  That  in  Jeremiah  x.w.  i., 
it  is  said  that  the  first  year  of  the  reign 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  corresponded  with  the 
fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah. 
and  as  the  captivity  was  in  the  third 
ye.ar  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim  (Dan.  i.  1), 
the  time  here  would  be  the  fourth  year  of 
the  reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  instead  of 
the  first.  (2.)  That  we  learn  from  ch.  i. 
5,  18,  that  Daniel  and  his  three  friends 
had  been  in  Babylon  already  three  years, 
under  a  process  of  training  preparatory 
to  their  being  presented  at  court,  and  as 
the  whole  narative  leads  us  to  suppose 
that  it  was  after  this  that  Daniel  was  re- 
garded as  enrolled  among  the  wise  men 
(comp.  ch.  ii.  13,  14),  on  the  supposition 
that  the   captivity  occurred   in  the  first 


year  of  the  reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  this 
would  bring  the  time  of  the  dream  into 
the  fourth  year  of  his  reign.  This  diffi- 
culty is  somewhat  increased  from  the 
fact  that  when  Nebuchadnezzar  went 
up  to  besiege  Jerusalem  he  is  called 
"  king,"  and  it  is  evident  that  he  did  not 
go  as  a  lieutenant  of  the  reigning  mo- 
narch ;  or  as  a  general  of  the  Chaldean 
forces  under  the  direction  of  another.  See 
2  Kings  xxiv.  1,  11.  Various  solutions 
of  this  difficulty  have  been  proposed,  but 
the  true  one  probably  is,  that  Nebuchad- 
nezzar reigned  some  time  conjointly  with 
his  father,  Nabopolassar,  and,  though  the 
title  Jcinff  was  given  to  him,  yet  the  reck- 
oning here  is  dated  from  the  time  when 
he  began  to  reign  alone,  and  that  this  was 
the  year  of  his  sole  occupancy  of  the 
throne.  Berosus  states  that  his  father, 
Nabopolasser,  was  aged  and  infirm,  and 
that  he  gave  up  a  part  of  his  army  to  hi? 
son   Nebuchadnezzar,  who   defeated  the 


DANIEL. 


[B.  0.  6oa 


chadnezzar  dreamed  dreams,  where- 

a  Ge.  41.  8 ;  Es.  6.  1 ;  Job  33.  15-17  ;  c.  4.  5. 


Egyptian  host  at  Carchemish  (Circessium) 
©n  the  Euphrates,  and  drove  iS^echo  out  of 
Asia.  The  victorious  prince  then  march- 
ed directly  to  Jerusalem,  and  Jehoiakim 
surrendered  to  him,  and  this  was  the  be- 
ginning of  the  seventy  years'  captivity. 
See  Jahn's  History  of  the  Hebrew  Com- 
monwealth, p.  134.  Nabopolassar  pro- 
bably died  about  two  years  after  that, 
and  Nebuchadnezzar  succeeded  to  the 
throne.  The  period  of  their  reigning 
together  was  two  years,  and  of  course  the 
second  year  of  his  single  reign  would  be 
the  fourth  of  his  entire  reign ;  and  a 
reckoning  from  either  would  be  proper, 
and  would  not  be  misunderstood.  Other 
modes  of  solution  have  been  adopted,  but 
as  this  meets  the  whole  difficulty,  and  is 
founded  on  truth,  it  is  unnecessary  to 
refer  to  them.  Comp.  Prof.  Stuart,  on 
Daniel,  Excursus  I.  pp.  19-30,  and  Ex- 
cursus II.  pp.  32,  33.  ^  Nebuchadnezzar 
dreamed  dreams.  The  plural  is  here 
used,  though  there  is  but  one  dream  men- 
tioned, and  probably  but  one  is  referred 
to,  for  Nebuchadnezzar,  when  speaking 
of  it  himself,  ver.  3,  says,  "  I  have  dream- 
ed a  dream."  In  the  Latin  Vulgate,  and 
in  the  Greek,  it  is  also  in  the  singular. 
It  is  probable  that  this  is  a  popular  use 
of  words,  as  if  one  should  say,  '  I  had 
strange  dreams  last  night,'  though  per- 
haps but  a  single  dreatiC  was  intended. 
Prof.  Bush.  Among  the  methods  by  which 
God  made  known  future  events  in  ancient 
times,  that  by  dreams  was  one  of  the 
most  common.  See  Notes  on  ch  i.  17; 
Intro,  to  Isaiah,  g  7,  (2) ;  comp.  Gen.  xx. 
3,  6,  xxxi.  11,  xx.xvii.  4,  5,  6,  xl.  5,  xli.  7, 
25;  1  Kings  iii.  5;  Numbers  xii.  6;  Joel 
ii.  8;  Job  xxxiii.  14-16.  The  belief  that 
the  will  of  heaven  was  communicated  to 
men  by  means  of  dreams,  was  prevalent 
throughout  the  world  in  ancient  times. 
Hence  the  striking  expression  in  Homer, 
II.  i.  63  —  KoX  yafi  T  oVap  £<  A(o;  ioriv  — 
the  dream  is  of  Jove.  So  in  the  com- 
mencement of  his  Second  Iliad,  he  repre- 
sents the  will  of  Jupiter  as  conveyed  to 
Agamemnon  by  Oiti'p'jjj  or  the  dream. 
So  Diog.  Laertins  makes  mention  of  a 
dream  of  Socrates,  by  which  he  foretold 
his  death  as  to  happen  in  three  days. 
This  method  of  communicating  the  divine 
will  was  adopted  not  only  in  reference  to 
(he  prophets,  but  also  to  those  who  were 


Tvith  »his  spirit  was  troubled,  and 
his  sleep  brake  from  him. 


strangers  to  religion,  and  even  to  wicked 
men,  as  in  the  case  of  Pharaoh,  Abime- 
loch,  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  butler  and 
baker  in  Egypt,  Ac.  In  every  such 
instance,  however,  it  was  necessary,  as  in 
the  case  before  us,  to  call  in  the  aid  of  a 
true  prophet  to  interpret  the  dream,  and 
it  was  only  when  thus  interpreted,  that  it 
took  its  place  among  the  certain  predic- 
tions of  the  future.  One  object  of  com- 
municating the  divine  will  in  this  mannei 
seems  to  have  been,  to  fix  the  attention 
of  the  person  who  had  the  dream  on 
the  subject,  and  to  prepare  him  to  re- 
ceive the  communication  which  God  had 
chosen  to  make  to  him.  Thus  it  cannot 
be  doubted  that  by  the  belief  in  dreams 
entertained  by  Pharaoh  and  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, as  disclosing  future  events,  and 
by  the  anxiety  of  mind  which  they  ex- 
perienced in  regard  to  the  dreams,  they 
were  better  prepared  to  receive  the  com- 
munications of  Joseph  and  Daniel  in 
reference  to  the  future  than  they  could 
have  been  by  any  other  method  of  making 
known  the  divine  will.  They  had  no 
doubt  that  some  important  communica- 
tion had  been  made  to  them  respecting 
the  future,  and  they  were  anxious  to 
know  what  it  was.  They  were  prepared, 
therefore,  to  welcome  any  explanation 
which  commended  itself  to  them  as  true, 
and  in  this  way  the  servants  of  the  true 
God  had  a  means  of  access  to  their 
hearts  which  they  could  have  found  in 
no  other  way.  By  what  laws  it  was  so 
regulated  that  a  dream  should  be  knoivn 
to  be  a  preintimation  of  coming  events, 
we  have  now  no  means  of  ascertaining. 
That  it  is  possible  for  God  to  have 
access  to  the  mind  in  sleep,  and  to  com- 
municate his  will  in  this  manner,  no  one 
can  doubt.  That  it  was,  so  far  as  cm- 
ployed  for  that  purpose,  a  safe  and  certain 
way,  is  demonstrated  by  the  results  of  the 
predictions  thus  made  in  the  case  of 
Abimelech,  Gen.  xx.  3,  6;  of  Joseph  and 
his  brethren.  Gen.  xxxvii.  4,  6,  6 ;  of 
Phar.ioh,  Gen  xli.  7,  25  ;  and  of  the  but- 
ler and  baker,  Gen.  xl.  5.  It  is  not,  how- 
ever, to  be  inferred  that  the  same  reliance, 
or  that  any  reliance,  is  now  to  be  placed 
on  dreams;  for  were  there  no  other  con- 
sideration against  such  reliance,  it  would 
be  sutficient  that  there  is  no  authorised 
interpreter  of  the  wanderings  of  the  mind 


B.C.  603  I 


CHAPTER  II. 


113 


2  Then  the  king  commanded  to 
call  the  majricians,  and  the  astrolo- 


in  sleep.  God  now  communicates  his 
truth  to  the  souls  of  men  in  other  ways. 
^  Wherewith  his  epirit  toas  troubled. 
Alike  by  the  unusual  nature  of  the 
dream,  and  by  the  impression  which  he 
undoubtedly  had  that  it  referred  to  some 
important  ti-uths  pertaiaing  to  his  king- 
dom and  to  future  times.  See  vs.  31-;^t5. 
The  Hebrew  word  here  rendered  troubled 
—  ^>'3 — means  properly  to  strike,  to  beat, 
to  pound  ;  then  in  Niph.,  to  be  moved,  or 
agitated ;  and  also  in  llithpa.,  to  be 
agitated,  ov  troubled.  The  proper  signi- 
fication of  the  word  is  that  of  striking  as 
on  an  anvil,  and  then  it  refers  to  any 
severe  stroke,  or  anj'thing  which  pro- 
duces agitation.  The  verb  occurs  only  in 
the  following  places :  Judges  xiii.  25, 
where  it  is  rendered  move,  and  Ps.  Ixxvii. 
4,  (5);  Gen  xli.  8;  Dan.  ii.  1,  3,  where  it 
is  rendered  troubled.  The  noun  is  of  fre- 
quent occurrence.  ^  And  his  sleep  brake 
from  Mm.  Heb.  v'jX  DJiipj  ^T\}t' .  Lit- 
erally '  His  sleep  was  upon  him.'  The 
Greek  is,  liis  sleep  was  from  him;  i.  e. 
left  him.  The  Vulgate,  his  sleep  fled 
(fugit) /cojii  him.  But  it  may  be  doubted 
whether  the  Hebrew  will  bear  this  con- 
struction. Probably  the  literal  construc- 
tion is  the  true  one,  by  which  the  sense 
of  the  Hebrew — ^J?  —  vpon,  will  bo  re- 
tained. The  meaning  then  would  be, 
that  this  remarkable  representation  oc- 
curred when  he  was  in  a  profound  sleep. 
It  was  a  dream,  and  not  an  of  en  vision. 
It  was  such  a  representation  as  passes 
before  the  mind  when  the  senses  are 
locked  in  repose,  and  not  such  as  was 
made  to  pass  before  the  minds  of  the  pro- 
phets when  they  were  permitted  to  see 
visions  of  the  future,  though  awake. 
Comp.  Num.  xxiv.  4,  16.  There  is  no- 
thing in  the  words  which  conveys  the 
idea  that  there  was  anything  preter- 
natural in  the  sleep  that  had  come  upon 
Nebuchadnezzar,  but  the  thought  is,  that 
all  this  occurred  when  he  icas  sound 
asleep.  Prof.  Stuart,  however,  renders 
this,  '  his  sleep  failed  him,'  and  so  does 
also  Gesenius.  AViner  renders  it,  'his 
Bleep  went  away  from  him.'  But  it  seems 
to  me  that  the  more  natural  idea  is  that 
which  occurs  in  the  literal  translation  of 
the  words,  that  this  occurred  as  a  dream, 
bi  a  state  of  profound  repose. 

10* 


gers,    and   the   sorcerers,   and    the 
Chaldeans,  for  to  show  the  kinc  hi* 


2.  Then  the  king  commanded.  That  is, 
when  he  awoke.  The  particle  rendered 
then,  does  not  imply  that  this  occurred 
immediately.  When  he  awoke,  his  mind 
was  agitated ;  he  was  impressed  with  the 
belief  that  lie  had  had  an  important 
divine  communication ;  but  he  could  not 
even  recall  the  dream  distinctly,  and  he 
resolved  to  summon  to  his  presence  those 
whoso  business  it  was  to  interpret  what 
were  regarded  as  prognostics  of  the 
future.  •[  The  maijicians  and  the  astro- 
logers. These  are  the  same  words  which 
occur  in  ch.  i.  20.  See  Notes  on  that 
place.  %  And  the  sorcerers.  Heb.  a'pub^. 
Vulg.  malejici — sorcerers.  Gr.  <papnaKovi. 
Syriac,  magician.  The  HebrcAV  word  is 
derived  from  I'^'p  —  kaspdph  —  meaning 
in  Piel,  to  practise  magic;  to  use  magic 
formulas,  or  incantations;  to  mutter;  and 
it  refers  to  the  various  arts  by  which 
those  who  were  addicted  to  magic  prac- 
tised their  deceptions.  The  particular 
idea  in  this  word  would  seem  to  be,  that 
on  such  occasions  some  forms  of  prayers 
were  used,  for  the  word  in  Syriac  means 
to  offer  prayers,  or  to  worship.  Probably 
the  aid  of  idol-gods  was  invoked  by  such 
persons  when  they  practised  incantations. 
The  word  is  found  only  in  the  following 
places  :  once  as  a  verb,  2  Chron.  xxxiii.  6, 
and  rendered  used  witchcraft,  and  as  a 
jxirticiple,  rendered  sorcerers,  in  Ex.  vii. 
11,  Dan.  ii.  2,  Mai.  iii.  5:  and  tvitch  in 
Ex.  xxii.  18  (17),  Deut.  xviii.  10.  The 
noun  Tf  5,  and  O'Py?,  is  used  in  the  fol- 
lowing places,  always  with  reference  to 
sorcery  or  witchcraft:  Jer.  xxvii.  9;  2 
Kings  ix.  22 ;  Isa.  xlvii.  9 ;  Mic.  v.  12 
(11) ;  Nah.  iii.  4.  It  may  not  be  easy  to 
specify  the  exact  sense  in  which  this 
word  is  used  as  distinguished  from  the 
others  which  relate  to  the  same  general 
subject,  but  it  would  seem  to  be  that  some 
form  of  jtraijer  or  invocation  was  em- 
ployed. The  persons  referred  to  did  not 
profess  to  interpret  the  prognostics  of 
future  events  by  any  original  skill  of  their 
own,  but  by  the  aid  of  the  gods.  ^  And 
the  Chaldeans.  See  Notes  on  ch.  i.  4. 
The  Chaldeans  appear  to  have  been  but 
one  of  the  tribes  or  nations  that  made  up 
the  community  at  Babylon  (comp.  Notes 
on  Isa.  xxiii.  13),  and  it  would  seem  that 


DANIEL. 


[B.C.  603 


dreama.      So  they  came  and  stood 
before  the  king. 

3  And  the  kino;  said  unto  them, 


at  this  time  they  were  particularly  de- 
voted to  the  practice  of  occult  arts,  and 
secret  sciences.  It  is  not  probable  that 
the  other  persons  referred  to  in  this  enu- 
meration were  Chaldeans.  The  Magians, 
if  any  of  these  were  employed,  were  Me- 
dians (Notes  on  ch.  i.  20),  and  it  is  not 
improbable  that  the  other  classes  of 
diviners  might  have  been  from  other 
nations.  The  purpose  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
was  to  assemble  at  his  court  whatever 
was  remarkable  throughout  the  world  for 
skill  and  knowledge  (see  Analysis  of 
ch  i.),  and  the  wise  men  of  the  Chaldeans 
were  employed  in  carrying  out  that  de- 
sign. The  Chaldeans  were  so  much  de- 
voted to  these  secret  arts,  and  became  so 
celebrated  for  them,  that  the  name  came, 
among  the  Greek  and  Roman  writers, 
to  be  used  to  denote  all  those  who  laid 
claim  to  extraordinary  powers  in  this  de- 
partment. Diodorus  Siculus,  L.  ii.,  says 
of  the  Chaldeans  in  Babylon,  that  "  they 
sustain  the  same  office  there  that  the 
priests  do  in  Egypt ;  for  being  devoted  to 
the  worship  of  God  through  their  whole 
lives,  they  give  themselves  to  philosophj', 
and  seek  from  astrology  their  highest 
glory."  Cicero  also  remarks  (De  Divin., 
p.  3),  that  "  the  Chaldeans,  so  named,  not 
from  their  art,  but  their  nation,  are  sup- 
posed by  a  prolonged  observation  of  the 
stars,  to  have  wrought  out  a  science  by 
which  could  bo  predicted  what  was  to 
happen  to  every  individual,  and  to  what 
fate  he  was  born."  Juvenal,  likewise 
(Sat.  vi.  V.  552-4),  has  this  passage : — 
"  Chaldaeis  sed  major  erit  fidueia ;  quid- 
quid  dixerit  astrologus,  credent  a  fonte 
relatum  Ammonis."  — "  But  their  chief 
dependence  is  upon  the  Chaldeans  ;  what- 
ever an  astrologer  declares,  they  will  re- 
ceive as  a  response  of  [.Jupiter]  Ammon." 
Horace  refers  to  the  Babylonians  as  dis- 
tinguished in  his  time  for  the  arts  of 
magic,  or  divination : 

"  nee  Babylonios, 
Teutaris  numeros."  Car.  Lib.  1,  xi. 
It  is  not  probable  that  the  whole  nation 
of  Chaldeans  was  devoted  to  these  arts, 
but  as  a  people  they  became  so  cele- 
brated in  this  kind  of  knowledge  that 
it  was  their  best-known  characteristic 
abroad.  *\  For  to  shore  the  Icing  his 
ireama.     To  show  him  what  the  dream 


I  have  dreamed  a  dream,  and  my 
spirit*  was  troubled  to  know  the 
dream. 


was,  and  to  explain  its  import.  Comp. 
Gen.  xli.  2-k ;  Judges  xiv.  12 ;  1  Kings 
X.  3.  That  it  was  common  for  kings  to 
call  in  the  aid  of  interpreters  to  explaia 
the  import  of  dreams,  appears  from  Hero- 
dotus. When  Astyages  ascended  the 
throne,  he  had  a  daughter,  whose  name 
was  Mandane.  She  had  a  dream,  which 
seemed  to  him  so  remarkable,  that  he 
called  in  the  "  Magi,"  whose  interpreta- 
tion, Herodotus  remarks,  was  of  such  a 
nature  that  it  "  terrified  him  exceed- 
ingly." He  was  so  much  influenced  by 
the  dream  and  the  interpretation,  that  it 
produced  an  entire  change  in  his  determi- 
nation respecting  the  marriage  of  his 
daughter.  Book  1,  cvii.  So  again,  after 
the  marriage  of  his  daughter,  Herodotus 
sa}'S  (B.  1,  cviii.) :  "Astyages  had  an- 
other vision.  A  vine  appeared  to  spring 
from  his  daughter  which  overspread  all 
Asia.  On  this  occasion,  also,  he  con- 
sulted his  interpreters :  the  result  was, 
that  he  sent  for  his  daughter  from  Persia, 
when  the  time  of  her  delivery  approached. 
On  her  arrival,  he  kept  a  strict  watch 
over  her,  intending  to  destroy  her  child. 
The  magi  had  declared  the  vision  to  inti- 
mate that  the  child  of  his  daughter  should 
supplant  him  on  the  throne."  Astj-ages, 
to  guard  against  this,  as  soon  as  Cyrus 
was  born,  sent  for  Harpagus,  a  person  in 
whom  he  had  confidence,  and  command- 
ed him  to  take  the  child  to  his  own  house, 
and  put  him  to  death.  These  passages 
in  Herodotus  show  that  what  is  here  re- 
lated of  the  king  of  Babylon,  demanding 
the  aid  of  magicians  and  astrologers  to 
interpret  his  dreams,  was  by  no  means  .an 
uncommon  occurrence. 

3.  And  the  lnn<j  said  unto  them,  I  have 
dreamed  a  dream,  and  mi/  sjiirit  was 
troubled  to  Icnoio  the  dream.  That  is, 
clearly,  to  know  all  about  it;  to  recollect 
distinctly  what  it  was,  and  to  understand 
what  it  meant.  He  was  agitated  by  so 
remarkable  a  dream ;  he  probably  had,  as 
Jerome  remarks,  a  shadowy  and  floating 
impression  of  what  the  dream  was — such 
as  we  often  have  of  a  dream  that  has 
agitated  our  minds,  but  of  which  we 
cannot  recall  the  distinct  and  full  image; 
and  he  desired  to  recall  that  distinctly, 
and  to  know  exactly  what  it  meant.  8e« 
ver.  1. 


B.  C.  603.] 

4  Then  spake  the  Chaldeans  to 
the  king  in  Syriac,  0  king,  live  ^  for 

a  1  Kings  i.  31. 

4.  Tlteii  spake  the  Chaldeans  to  the 
king.  The  meaning  is,  either  that  the 
ChaJdcans  spoke  in  the  name  of  the  entire 
company  of  the  soothsayers  and  magi- 
cians (Notes,  ch.  i.  20,  ii.  2),  because  they 
were  the  most  prominent  among  them,  or 
the  name  is  used  to  denote  the  collective 
body  of  soothsayers,  meaning  that  this 
request  was  made  by  the  entire  company. 
^  In  St/riac.  In  the  original  —  ri'lj^K — 
in  Aramean.  Gr.  Supiori  —  in  Si/riac.  So 
the  Vulgate.  The  Syriac  retains  the 
original  word.  The  word  means  Ai-a- 
mean,  and  the  reference  is  to  that  lan- 
guage which  is  known  as  East  Aramean 
— a  general  term  embracing  the  Chaldce, 
the  Syriac,  and  the  language  which 
were  spoken  in  Mesopotamia.  See  Noies 
on  ch.  i.  4.  This  was  the  vernacular 
tongue  of  the  king  and  of  his  subjects, 
and  was  that  in  which  the  Chaldeans 
would  naturally  address  him.  It  is  re- 
ferred to  here  by  the  author  of  this 
book,  perhaps  to  explain  the  reason  why 
he  himself  makes  use  of  this  language 
in  explaining  the  dream.  The  use  of  this, 
however,  is  not  confined  to  the  statement 
of  what  the  magicians  said,  but  is  con- 
tinued to  the  close  of  the  seventh  chapter. 
Comp.  the  Intro.  §  4,  III.  The  language 
used  is  that  which  is  commonly  called 
Chaldee.  It  is  written  in  the  same  cha- 
racter as  the  Hebrew,  and  differs  from 
that  as  one  dialect  differs  from  another. 
It  was,  doubtless,  well  understood  by  the 
Jews  in  their  captivity,  and  was  probably 
spoken  by  them  after  their  return  to  their 
own  land.  ^  0  Icing,  live  for  ever.  This 
is  a  form  of  speech  quite  common  in  ad- 
dressing monarchs.  See  1  Sam.  x.  24 ; 
1  Kings  i.  25  (margin);  ch.  iii.  9,  v.  10. 
The  expression  is  prevalent  still,  as  in  the 
phrases  '  Long  live  the  king,'  '  T'n-e 
Vempcrour,'  '  Vive  I'roi,'  ite.  It  is  found- 
ed on  the  idea  that  long  life  is  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  blessing,  and  that  we  can  in 
no  way  express  our  good  wishes  for  any 
one  better  than  to  wish  him  length  of 
days.  In  this  place,  it  was  merely  the 
usual  expression  of  respect  and  homage, 
snowing  their  earnest  wish  for  the  welfare 
of  the  monarch.  They  were  willing  to 
do  anything  to   promote   his  happinesS; 


CHAPTER   II. 


115 


ever:  tell  thy  servants  the  dreaiu, 
and  we  Tvill  show  the  interpre- 
tation. 


and  the*continuance  of  his  life  and  reign. 
It  was  especially  proper  for  them  to  use 
this  language,  as  they  were  about  to 
make  a  rather  unusual  request,  which 
7n>ght  be  construed  as  an  act  of  disre- 
spect, implying  that  the  king  had  not 
given  them  all  the  means  which  it  waa 
equitable  for  them  to  have  in  explaining 
the  matter,  by  requiring  them  to  interpret 
the  dream  when  he  had  not  told  them 
what  it  was.  ^  Tell  thy  servants  the 
dream,  and  we  will  show  the  interitreta- 
tion.  The  claim  which  they  set  up  in 
regard  to  the  future  was  evidently  only 
that  of  explaining  what  were  regarded  as 
the  prognostics  of  future  events.  It  was 
not  that  of  being  able  to  recall  what  is 
forgotten,  or  even  to  originate  what  might 
be  regarded  as  pre-intimations  of  what  is 
to  h:ippen.  This  was  substantially  tho 
claim  which  was  asserted  by  all  the 
astrologers,  augurs,  and  soothsayers  of 
ancient  times.  Dreams,  the  flight  of 
birds,  the  aspect  of  the  entrails  of  ani- 
mals slain  for  sacrifice,  the  positions  of 
the  stars,  meteors,  and  uncommon  ap- 
pearances in  the  heavens,  were  supposed 
to  be  intimations  made  by  the  gods,  of 
what  was  to  occur  in  future  times,  and 
the  business  of  those  who  claimed  the 
power  of  divining  the  future,  was  merely 
to  interpret  these  things.  When  the  king, 
therefore,  required  that  they  should  re- 
call the  dream  itself  to  his  own  mind,  it 
was  a  claim  to  something  which  was  not 
involved  in  their  profession,  and  which 
they  regarded  as  unjust.  To  that  power 
they  made  no  pretensions.  If  it  be  asked 
why,  as  they  were  mere  jugglers  and  pre- 
tenders, they  did  not  invent  something 
and  state  that  as  his  dream,  since  he  had 
forgotten  what  his  dream  actually  was, 
we  may  repl}',  (1.)  that  there  is  no  cer- 
tain evidence  that  they  were  not  sincero 
in  what  they  professed  themselves  able  to 
do  —  for  we  are  not  to  suppose  that  all 
who  claimed  to  be  soothsayers  and 
astrologers  were  hj'pocrites  and  inten- 
tional deceivers.  It  was  not  at  that 
period  of  the  world  certainly  determined 
that  nothing  could  be  ascertained  respect- 
ing  the  future  by  dreams,  and  by  tho 
positions  of  the  stars,  <tc.  Dreams  uei-e 
among  the  methods  by  which  the  future 
i  was  made  known,  and  whether  the  know- 


116  DANIEL.  [B.C.  OOd 

5  The  king  answered  and  said  to    the  Chaldeans,  The   thiug  is  gone 


ledge  of  what  is  to  come  could  be  obtain- 
ed i'rom  the  positions  of  the  stars,  &c., 
was  a  question  whicli  was  at  that  time 
settled.  Even  Lord  Bacon  maintained 
that  the  science  of  astrology  was  not  to 
be  rejected,  but  to  be  reformed.  (2.)  If 
the  astrologers  had  been  disposed  to 
attempt  to  deceive  the  king,  there  is  no 
probability  that  they  could  have  succeed- 
ed in  palming  an  invention  of  their  own 
on  him  as  his  own  dream.  We  may  not 
be  able  distinctly  to  recollect  a  dream, 
but  wc  have  a  sufficient  impression  of  it 
—  of  its  outlines  —  or  of  some  striking, 
though  disconnected,  things  in  it,  to  know 
•what  it  is  not.  A\'e  might  instantly  recog- 
nise it  if  stated  to  us;  we  should  see  at 
once,  if  any  one  should  attempt  to  deceive 
us  by  palming  an  invented  dream  on  us, 
that  that  was  not  what  we  had  dreamed. 

5.  The  kiiif/  unsu-ered  and  said  to  the 
Chaldeans,  The  thi)ig  is  gone  from  me. 
The  Vulgate  renders  this,  Sermo  reeessit 
a.  me  — '  The  word  is  departed  from  me.' 
So  the  Greek,  'O  Xdyoi  an-'  Cfioii  anmrrj, 
Luther,  Es  ist  mir  eutf alien  —  'It  has 
fallen  away  from  me,'  or  has  departed 
from  me.  Covcrdale,  "It  is  gone  from 
me."  The  Chaldee  word  rendered  "  the 
thing" — '^P;P  —  means  properly  a  word, 
saying,  discourse  —  something  which  is 
spoken;  then,  like  1?7,  and  the  Greek 
'piifta  —  a  thing.  The  reference  here 
is  to  the  matter  under  consideration, 
to  wit,  the  dream  and  its  meaning. 
The  fair  interpretation  is,  that  he  had  for- 
gotten the  dream,  and  that  if  he  retained 
any  recollection  of  it,  it  was  only  such  an 
imperfect  outline  as  to  alarm  him.  The 
word  rendered  "is  gone" — ^11?  —  which 
occurs  only  here  and  in  ver.  8,  is  sup- 
posed to  be  the  same  as  Tit?. —  to  go  away, 
to  depart.  Gesenius  renders  the  whole 
phrase,  "  The  word  has  gone  out  from 
me ;  i.  e.  what  I  have  said  is  ratified,  and 
cannot  be  recalled  :"  and  Prof.  Bush  {in 
loc.)  contends  that  this  is  the  true  inter- 
pretation, and  this  also  is  the  interpreta- 
tion preferred  by  J.  D.  Michaelis,  and 
Dathe.  A  construction  somewhat  similar 
is  adopted  by  Aben.  Ezra,  C.  B.  Michaelis, 
Winer,  Hengstenberg,  and  Prof.  Stuart, 
that  it  means,  "  My  decree  is  firm,  or 
neadfastj"  to  wit,  that  if  they  did  not 


furnish  an  interpretation  of  the  dream, 
they  should  be  cut  off.  The  question 
as  to  the  true  interpretation,  then,  ia 
between  two  constructions  —  whether  it 
means,  as  in  our  version,  that  the  dream 
had  departed  from  him,  »^at  is,  that  ho 
had  forgotten  it ;  or,  that  a  decree  or  com- 
mand had  gone  from  him,  that  if  they 
could  not  interpret  the  dream,  they 
should  be  destroyed.  That  the  former  is 
the  correct  interpretation,  seems  to  me  to 
be  evident.  (1.)  It  is  the  natural  con- 
struction, and  accords  best  with  the  mean- 
ing of  the  original  words.  Thus  no  one 
can  doubt  that  the  word  ■^^P,  and  the 
words  "i37  and  'pnjia,  are  used  in  the  sense 
of  tiling,  and  that  the  natural  and  proper 
meaning  of  the  Chaldee  verb  itN  is  to  go 
away,  depart.  Comp.  the  Ileb.  ^l^ ,  in 
Deut.  xxxii.  36,  "  He  seeth  that  their 
power  is  gone  ;"  1  Sam.  ix.  7,  "  The  bread 
is  spent  in  our  vessels;"  Job  xiv.  11, 
"  The  waters  fail  from  the  sea;"  and  the 
Chaldee  ':'I»<.,  in  Ezra  iv.  23,  "  They  went 
vp  in  haste  to  Jerusalem,"  v.  8,  "  Wo 
^cent  into  the  province  of  Judea ;"  and 
Dan.  ii.  17,  24,  vi.  18  (19),  19  (20). 
(2.)  This  interpretation  is  sustained  by 
the  Vulgate  of  Jerome,  and  by  the  Greek. 
(3.)  It  does  not  appear  that  any  such 
command  had  at  that  time  gone  forth 
from  the  king,  and  it  was  only  when  they 
came  before  him  that  he  promulgated 
such  an  order.  Even  though  the  word,  as 
Gesenius  and  Zickler  {C'haldaismns  Ban. 
Proph.),  maintain,  is  a  feminine  participle 
present,  instead  of  a  verb  in  the  pre- 
terite, still  it  would  then  as  well  apply  to 
the  dream  departing  from  him,  as  the 
command  or  edict.  We  may  suppose  the 
king  to  say,  '  The  thing  leaves  me  ;  I 
cannot  recall  it.'  (4.)  It  was  so  under- 
stood by  the  magicians,  and  the  king  did 
not  attempt  to  correct  their  apprehension 
of  what  he  meant.  Thus,  in  ver.  7,  they 
saj',  "  Let  the  king  tell  his  servants  the 
dream,  and  we  will  show  the  interprct.a 
tion  thereof."  This  shows  that  they  un- 
derstood that  the  dream  had  gone  from 
him,  and  that  they  could  not  be  expected 
to  interpret  its  meaning  until  they  were 
apprised  what  it  was.  (5.)  It  is  not 
necessary  to  supijose  that  the  king  re- 
tained the  memory  of  the  dream  himself, 
and  that  he  meant  merely  to  try  them ; 


B.  C.  608.] 


CHAPTER   II. 


m 


from  me :  if  ye  will  not  make 
known  unto  me  the  dream,  with 
the  interpretation  thereof,  ye  shall 


that  is,  that  he  told  them  a  deliberate 
falsehood,  iu  order  to  put  their  ability  to 
the  test.  Nebuchadnezzar  was  a  cruel 
and  severe  monarch,  and  such  a  thing 
would  not  have  been  entirely  inconsistent 
with  his  character;  but  we  should  not 
needlessly  charge  cruelty  and  tyranny  on 
any  man,  nor  should  we  do  it  unless  the 
evidence  is  so  clear  that  we  cannot  avoid 
it.  Besides,  that  such  a  test  should  be 
proposed,  is  in  the  highest  degree  impro- 
bable. There  was  no  need  of  it ;  and  it 
was  contrary  to  the  established  belief  in 
such  matters.  These  men  were  retained 
at  court,  among  other  reasons,  for  the 
very  purpose  of  explaining  the  prognos- 
tics of  the  future.  There  was  confidence 
in  them;  and  they  were  retained  because 
there  was  confidence  iu  them.  It  does 
not  appear  that  the  Babylonian  monarch 
had  had  any  reason  to  distrust  their 
ability  as  to  what  they  professed ;  and 
why  should  he,  therefore,  on  this  occasion 
resolve  to  put  them  to  so  unusual,  and 
obviously  so  unjust  a  trial  ?  For  these 
reasons,  it  seems  clear  to  mc  that  our 
common  version  has  given  the  correct 
sense  of  this  passage,  and  that  the  meaning 
is,  that  the  dream  had  actually  so  far 
departed  from  him  that  he  could  not  re- 
peat it,  though  he  retained  such  an  im- 
pression of  its  portentous  nature,  and  of 
its  appalling  outline,  as  to  fill  his  mind 
with  alarm.  As  to  the  objection  derived 
from  this  view  of  the  passage  by  Bertholdt 
to  tlie  authenticity  of  this  chapter,  that  it 
is  wholly  improbable  that  any  man  would 
be  so  unreasonable  as  to  doom  others  to 
punishment  because  they  could  not  recall 
his  dream,  since  it  entered  not  into  their 
profession  to  be  able  to  do  it  (Comm.  i.  p. 
p.  192),  it  may  be  remarked,  that  the  cha- 
racter of  Nebuchadnezzar  was  such  as  to 
make  what  is  stated  here  by  Daniel  by  no 
means  improbable.  Thus  it  is  said  re- 
specting him  (2  Kings  xxv.  7),  "  And  they 
slew  the  sons  of  Zedekiah  be/ore  his  eyes, 
and  put  out  the  eyes  of  Zedekiah,  and 
bound  him  with  fetters  of  brass,  and 
carried  him  to  Babylon."  Comp.  2  Kings 
xxv.  18-21;  Jer.  xxxix.  5,  seq.  lii.  9-11. 
See  also  Dan.  iv.  17,  where  he  is  called 
"the  basest  of  men."  Comp.  Hengsten- 
berg,  Die  Authentie  des  Daniel,  pp.  79-81. 
On  this  objection,  see  Intro,  to  the  chap- 


be  ^  cut  in  ^  pieces,  and  your  « house* 
shall  be  made  a  dun<rhill. 


ter,  §  1,  I.  ^  ^/  ye  will  not  make  known 
vnto  me  the  dream,  with  the  interpretatin^ 
thereof.  Whatever  may  be  thought  as  to 
the  question  whether  he  had  actually  for- 
gotten the  dream,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  he  demanded  that  they  should  state 
what  it  was,  and  then  explain  it.  This 
demand  was  probably  as  unusual  as  it 
was  in  one  sense  unreasonable,  since  it 
did  not  fall  fairly  within  their  profession. 
Yet  it  was  not  unreasonable  in  this  sense, 
that  if  they  really  had  communication 
with  the  gods,  and  were  qualified  to  ex- 
plain future  events,  it  might  be  sup- 
posed that  they  would  be  enabled  to 
recall  this  forgotten  dream.  If  the  gods 
gave  them  power  to  explain  what  was  to 
come,  they  could  as  easily  enable  them  to 
recall  the  past.  ^  Ye  shall  be  cut  in 
pieces.  Marg.  made.  The  Chaldee  is, 
'  Ye  shall  be  made  into  pieces ;'  referring 
to  a  mode  of  punishment  that  was  com- 
mon to  many  ancient  nations.  Comp. 
1  Sam.  XV.  33  :  "And Samuel  hewed  Agag 
in  pieces  before  the  Lord  in  Gilgal." 
Thus  Orpheus  is  said  to  have  been  torn 
in  pieces  by  the  Thrncian  women ;  and 
Bessus  was  cut  in  pieces  by  order  of 
Alexander  the  Great.  ^  And  your  houses 
shall  be  made  a  dunghill.  Comp.  2  Kings 
X.  27.  This  is  an  expression  denoting 
that  their  houses,  instead  of  being  ele- 
gant, or  comfortable  mansions,  should  be 
devoted  to  the  vilest  of  uses,  and  sub- 
jected to  all  kinds  of  dishonour  and  de- 
filement. The  language  here  used  is  in 
accordance  with  that  which  is  commonly 
employed  by  Orientals.  They  imprecate 
all  sorts  of  indignities  and  abominations 
on  the  objects  of  their  dislike,  and  it  is 
not  uncommon  for  them  to  smear  over 
with  filth  what  is  the  object  of  their  con- 
ten-nt  or  abhorrence.  Thus  when  the 
caliph  Omar  took  Jerusalem,  at  the  head 
of  the  Saracen  army,  after  ravaging  the 
greater  part  of  the  city,  he  caused  dung 
to  be  spread  over  the  site  of  the  sanctu- 
ary, in  token  of  the  abhorrence  of  all 
Mussclmans,  and  of  its  being  henceforth 
regarded  as  the  refuse  and  otiTscouring  of 
alf  things.  Prof.  Bush.  The  Greek  ren- 
ders  this,  "And  your  houses  shall  bo 
plundered ;"  the  Vulgate,  "  And  your 
houses  shall  be  confiscated."  But  these 
renderings  are  entirely  arbitrary.     This 


118 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  603w 


6  But » if  ye  show  the  dream,  and 

the  interpretation  thereof,  ye  shall 
receive  of  me  gifts  and  ^  rewards 
and  great  honour :  therefore  show 
me  the  dream,  and  the  interpreta- 
tion thereof. 

7  They  answered  again  and  said, 

»  c.  5. 16.  b  Or,  fee ;  yer.  48,  c.  5. 17. 

may  seem  to  be  a  harsh  punishment  which 
was  threatened,  and  some  may,  perhaps, 
bo  disposed  to  say  that  it  is  improbable 
that  a  monarch  would  allow  himself  to 
use  such  intemperate  language,  and  to 
make  use  of  so  severe  a  threatening, 
especially  when  the  magicians  had  as  yet 
shown  no  inability  to  interpret  the  dream, 
and  had  given  no  reasons  to  apprehend 
that  they  would  be  unable  to  do  it.  But 
we  are  to  remember,  (1.)  the  cruel  .and 
arbitrary  character  of  the  king  (see  the 
references  above) ;  (2.)  the  nature  of  an 
Oriental  despotism,  in  which  a  monarch 
is  accustomed  to  require  all  his  commands 
to  be  obeyed,  and  his  wishes  gratified 
promptly,  on  pain  of  death;  (3.)  the  fact 
that  his  mind  was  greatly  excited  by  the 
dream;  and  (4.)  that  he  was  certain  that 
something  portentous  to  his  kingdom  had 
been  prefigured  by  the  dream,  and  that 
this  was  a  case  in  which  all  the  force  of 
threatening,  and  all  the  prospect  of 
splendid  reward,  should  be  used,  that  they 
might  be  induced  to  tax  their  powers  to 
the  utmost,  and  allay  the  tumults  of  his 
mind. 

6.  But  if  ye  show  the  dream.  If  you 
show  what  the  dream  was.  ^  And  the 
interpretation  thereof.  What  it  signifies. 
That  is,  they  were  so  to  state  the  dream 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  would  recognise  it ; 
and  they  were  to  give  such  an  explana- 
tion of  i.t  as  would  commend  itself  to  his 
mind  as  the  true  one.  On  this  last  point 
he  would  doubtless  rely  much  on  their 
supposed  wisdom  in  performing  this  duty, 
but  it  would  seem  clear,  also,  that  it  was 
necessary  that  the  interpretation  should 
be  scon  to  be  a/ai/- interpretation,  or  such 
as  would  hafairli/  implied  in  the  dream. 
Thus,  when  Daniel  made  known  the  in- 
terpretation, he  saw  at  once  that  it  met  all 
the  features  of  the  dream,  and  he  admitted 
it  to  be  correct.  So  ai.«o  when  Daniel  ex- 
plained the  hand-writing  on  the  wall  to 
Belshazzar,  he  admitted  the  justness  of 
it,  and  loaded  him  with  honours.  Daniel 
r.  29.     So  when  Joseph  exclained   the 


Let  the  king  tell  his  servants  thti 
dream,  and  we  will  show  the  inter- 
pretation of  it. 

8  The  king  answered  and  said,  I 
know  of  certainty  that  ye  would 
c  gain  th  3  time,  because  ye  see  the 
thing  ia  gone  from  me. 

<=  Or,  buy;  Ep,  5. 16. 


dreams  of  Pharaoh,  he  at  once  saw  thb 
appropriateness  of  the  explanation,  and 
admitted  it  to  be  correct  (Gen  xli.  39-45), 
and  so  in  the  case  above  referred  to  (Notes 
ou  ver.  2),  of  Astyages  respecting  the 
dreams  of  his  daughter  (Herodo.  1,  cvii. 
cviii.),  he  at  once  saw  that  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  dreams  proposed  by  the  Magi 
accorded  with  the  dreams,  and  took  his 
measures  accordingly.  %  Ye  shall  receive 
of  me  gifts,  and  rewards,  and  great  honour. 
Intending  to  appeal  to  their  highest  hopes 
to  induce  them,  if  possible,  to  disclose  the 
meaning  of  the  dream.  He  specifies  no 
particular  rewards,  but  makes  the  promise 
general,  and  the  evident  meaning  is,  that, 
in  such  a  case,  he  would  bestow  what  it  be- 
came a  monarch  like  him  to  give.  That 
the  usual  rewards  in  such  a  case  were  such 
as  were  adapted  to  stimulate  to  the  most 
vigorous  exertions  of  their  powers,  may 
be  seen  from  the  honour  which  he  con- 
ferred on  Daniel  when  he  made  known 
the  dream  (ver.  48),  and  from  the  re- 
wards which  Belshazzar  conferred  on 
Daniel  for  making  known  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  writing  on  the  wall  (  ch.  v.  29) : 
"  Then  commanded  Belshazzar,  and  they 
clothed  Daniel  with  scarlet,  and  put  a 
chain  of  gold  about  his  neck,  and  made  a 
pft)clamation  concerning  him,  that  ho 
should  be  the  third  ruler  in  the  kingdom." 
Comp.  Esther  v.  11.  vi.  7-9. 

7.  Thci/  answered  again  and  said,  Let 
the  king  tell  his  servants  the  dream,  and 
ice  v:ill  shoio  the  interpretatioyi  of  it. 
Certainly  not  an  unreasonable  request,  in 
any  circumstances,  and  especially  in 
theirs.  They  did  not  profess,  evidently, 
to  be  able  to  recall  a  dream  that  was  for- 
gotten, but  the  extent  of  their  profession 
on  this  subject  appears  to  have  been,  that 
they  were  able  to  explain  what  was  com- 
monly regarded  as  a  prognostic  of  a  futuro 
event. 

8.  The  king  answered  and  said,  ] 
know  of  certainty  that  ye  would  gain 
the  time.    Marg.  luy.    The  Chaldeo  word. 


B.  C.  G03.] 


CHAPTER   II. 


119 


9  But  if  yc  will  not  make  known 
unto  me  the  dream,  there  is  hut  one 


rJ3{  (from?5"),  means  to  get  for  one's 
Belf,  buy,  gain,  procure.  Greek,  F.^ayopditTs 
--'that  ye  reHecm  time;  and  so  the  Vul- 
gate—  qnod  fc»!pu»  rcdimitis.  The  idea 
is,  thaf,  they  saw  that  they  could  not  com- 
ply with  his  requisition,  and  that  their 
asking  him  (ver.  7)  to  state  the  dream 
was  only  a  pretext  for  delay,  in  the  hope 
that  in  the  interval  some  device  might  be 
hit  on  by  them  to  appease  him,  or  to 
avert  his  threatened  indignation.  It  would 
be  natural  to  suppose  that  they  might 
hope  that  on  reflection  he  would  become 
more  calm,  and  that,  although  they 
might  not  be  able  to  recall  the  dream  and 
explain  it,  ye\,  it  would  be  seen  to  be  un- 
reasonable to  ixpect  or  demand  it.  The 
king  seems  to  have  supposed  that  some 
such  thoughts  were  passing  through  their 
niiods,  and  he  charges  on  them  such  a 
project.  The  argument  of  the  king  seems 
to  have  been  something  like  this :  '  They 
who  can  explain  a  dream  correctly,  can  as 
well  t-ell  what  it  is  as  what  its  interpreta- 
tion is,  for  the  one  is  as  much  the  result 
(f  divine  influence  as  the  other;  and  if 
men  can  hope  for  divine  helj)  in  the  one 
case  why  not  in  the  other  ?  As  you  can- 
not, therefore,  recall  the  dream,  it  is 
plain  that  you  cannot  interpret  it,  and 
your  only  object  in  demanding  to  know 
it,  is  that  j'ou  may  ward  off  as  long  as 
possible  the  execution  of  the  threatened 
sentence,  and,  if  practicable,  escape  it 
altogether.'  It  is  not  improbable  that 
what  they  said  was  more  than  the  simple 
request  recorded  in  ver.  7.  They  would 
naturally  enlarge  on  it,  by  attempting  to 
show  how  unreasonable  was  the  demand 
of  the  king  in  the  case,  and  their  argu- 
ments would  give  a  fair  pretex  for  what 
he  here  charges  on  them.  *l  Because  ye 
cr.e  the  thinc)  is  gone  from  me.  According 
to  the  interpretation  proposed  in  ver.  6, 
the  dream.  The  meaning  is,  '  You  see 
that  I  have  forgotten  it.  I  have  made  a 
positive  statement  on  that  point.  There 
can  be  no  hope,  therefore,  that  it  can  be 
recalled,  and  it  is  clear  that  your  only 
object  must  he  to  gain  time.  Nothing  can 
be  gained  by  delay,  and  the  matter  may 
therefore  be  determined  at  once,  and  your 
conduct  be  construed  as  a  confession  that 
you  cannot  perform  what  is  required,  and 
the  sentence  proceed  without  delay.'   This 


decree  for  you  ;  for  ye  have  prepared 
lying  and  corrupt  Avords  to  spcwk 

makes  better  sense,  it  seems  to  mo,  ihan 
to  suppose  that  he  means  that  ?.  sentence 
had  gone  forth  from  him  that  if  they 
could  not  recall  and  interpret  it  they 
should  be  put  to  death. 

9.  But  if  ye  will  not  make  hnoicn  the 
dream,  there  is  but  one  decree  for  you. 
That  is,  you  shall  share  the  same  fate. 
You  shall  all  be  cut  to  pieces,  and  your 
houses  reduced  to  ruin.  ver.  5.  There 
shall  be  no  favour  shown  to  any  class  of 
you,  or  to  any  individual  among  you.  It 
seems  to  have  been  supposed  that  the 
responsibility  rested  on  them  individually 
as  well  as  collectively,  and  that  it  would 
be  right  to  hold  each  and  every  one  of 
them  bound  to  explain  the  matter.  As 
no  difference  of  obligation  was  recognised, 
there  would  be  no  difference  of  criminality. 
It  should  be  said,  however,  that  there  is 
a  difference  of  interpretation  here.  Gese- 
nius,  and  some  others,  render  the  wortl 
translated  decree — HI — counsel, plan, pur 
2}ose,  and  suppose  that  it  means,  '  this  onlj 
is  your  counsel,  or  plan  ;'  that  is,  to  pre- 
pare lying  words,  and  to  gain  time.  So 
Prof.  Stuart  renders  the  verse,  "  If  ye  will 
not  make  known  to  me  the  dream,  one 
thing  is  your  purpose,  both  a  false  and 
deceitful  word  have  ye  agreed  to  utter 
before  me,  until  the  time  shall  have 
changed;  therefore  tell  me  the  dream, 
and  then  I  shall  know  that  y^n  can  show 
me  the  interpretation  thereof."  The 
original  word,  however,  is  most  com- 
monly used  in  the  sense  of  law  or  decree. 
See  Deut.  xxxiii.  2;  Es.  i.  8,  13,  15,  19, 
ii.  8,  iii.  8,  14,  15,  iv.  3,  8,  11,  16,  viii.  13, 
14,  17,  ix.  1,  13,  14,  and  there  seems  to 
bo  no  necessity  for  departing  from  the 
common  translation.  It  contains  a  sense 
according  to  the  truth  in  the  case,  and  is 
in  accordance  with  the  Greek,  Latin,  and 
SjTiac  versions.  ^  For  ye  have  prepared 
lying  and  corrupt  words  to  speak  before 
me.  That  is,  'You  have  done  this  in  asking 
me  to  state  the  dream  (vs.  4,  7),  and  in 
the  demand  that  the  dream  should  bo 
made  known  to  you,  in  order  that  you 
may  interpret  it.  I  shall  know  by  your 
inability  to  recall  the  dream  that  you  have 
been  acting  a  false  and  deceitful  part,  and 
that  your  pretensions  were  all  false.  Your 
wish,  therefore,  to  have  me  state  the 
dream  will  be  shown  to  be  a  mere  pre- 


120 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  603. 


before  me,  till  the  time  be  changed : 
therefore  tell  me  the  dream,  and 
I  a  shall  knoAV  that  ye  can  show  me 
the  interpretation  thereof. 

10  1[  The  Chaldeans  answered  be- 
fore the  king,  and  said.  There  is  not 
a  man  upon  the  earth  that  can  show 
the  king's  matter :  therefore  there  is 
=■  Is.  41.  23. 


tence,  an  artifice  for  delay,  that  you  might 
put  off  the  execution  of  the  sentence  with 
the  hope  of  escaping  altogether.'  ^  2'ill 
the  time  be  cliaiir/cd.  That  is,  till  a  new 
state  of  things  shall  occur  ,•  either  until  his 
purpose  might  change,  and  his  anger 
should  subside,  or  till  there  should  be  a 
change  of  government.  It  was  natural 
for  such  thoughts  to  pass  through  the 
mind  of  the  king,  since  as  matters  could 
be  no  worse  for  them  if  the  subject  was 
delayed,  there  was  a  possibility  that  they 
might  be  letter  —  for  any  change  would 
be  liliely  to  be  an  advantage.  There 
does  not  appear  to  have  been  any  great 
confidence  or  afl'ection  on  either  side. 
The  king  suspected  that  they  were  in- 
fluenced by  bad  motives,  and  they  cer- 
tainly had  no  strong  reasons  for  attach- 
ment to  him.  Comp.  Notes  on  ver.  21, 
and  ch.  vii.  25. 

10.  The  Chaldeans  anstcered  hefore  the 
king,  and  said.  Perhaps  the  Chaldeans 
answered  because  they  were  the  highest 
in  favour,  and  were  those  in  whom  most 
confidence  was  usually  reposed  in  such 
matters.  See  Notes  on  ver  2.  On  such 
an  occasion  those  would  be  likely  to  be 
put  forward  to  announce  their  inability  to 
do  this,  who  would  be  supposed  to  be  able 
to  interpret  the  dream,  if  any  could,  and  on 
whom  most  reliance  was  usually  placed. 
^  There  is  not  a  man  tipon  the  earth 
that  can  show  the  Icing's  matter.  Chald. 
Kipi?'3^~  7]^ — '  upon  the  dri/ ground.'  Comp. 
Gen.  i.  10.  The  meaning  is,  that  the 
thingwas  utterly  beyond  the  power  of  man. 
It  was  what  none  who  practised  the  arts 
of  divining  laid  claim  to.  They  doubt- 
less supposed  that  as  great  proficients  in 
that  art  as  the  world  could  produce  might 
be  found  among  the  wise  men  assembled 
at  the  court  of  Babylon,  and  if  they  failed 
they  inferred  that  all  others  would  fail. 
This  was,  therefore,  a  decided  confession 
of  their  inability  in  the  matter,  but  they 
meant  to  break  the  force  of  that  mortify- 


no  king,  lord,  nor  ruler,  that  asked 
such  things  at  any  magician,  or 
astrologer,  or  Chaldean. 

11  And  it  is  a  rare  thing  that  the 
king  requireth,  and  there  is  none 
other  that  can  show  it  before  the 
king,  except  ^  the  gods,  whose  dwel- 
ling "=  is  not  with  flesh. 

'  ver.  28.  b  Is.  C6. 1,  2. 


ing  confession,  and  perhaps  to  appease 
the  wrath  of  the  king,  by  aflfirming  that 
the  thing  was  wholly  beyond  the  human 
powers,  and  that  no  one  could  be  expect- 
ed to  do  what  was  demanded.  ^  There- 
fore there  is  no  king,  lord,  nor  ruler. 
No  one  has  ever  made  a  similar  demand. 
The  matter  is  so  clear,  the  incompe- 
tency of  man  to  make  such  a  disclosure 
is  so  manifest,  that  no  potentate  of  any 
rank  ever  made  such  a  request.  They 
designed,  undoubtedly,  to  convince  the 
king  that  the  request  was  so  unreasonable 
that  he  would  not  insist  on  it.  They 
were  urgent,  for  their  life  depended  on  it, 
and  they  apprehended  that  they  had  jus- 
tice on  their  side. 

11.  And  it  is  a  rare  thing  that  the  king 
requireth.  Chald.  H'j^lp' — meaning  choice, 
vahialle,  costli/  ;  then  heavy,  hard,  diffi- 
cult. Gr.  ffapi;.  Vulg.  gravis  —  heavy, 
weighty.  The  idea  is  not  so  much  that 
the  thing  demanded  by  the  king  was  un- 
common or  rarely  made — though  that  was 
true,  as  that  it  was  so  difiicult  as  to  be 
beyond  the  human  powers.  They  would 
not  have  been  likely  on  such  an  occasion 
to  say  that  the  requirement  was  abso- 
lutely unjust  or  unreasonable.  The  term 
which  they  used  was  respectful,  and  yet 
it  implied  that  no  man  cou'd  have  any 
hope  of  solving  the  question  as  it  was 
proposed  by  him.  ^  And  there  is  none 
other  that  can  show  it  hefore  the  king  ex- 
cept the  gods,  whose  dwelling  is  not  with 
Jlesh.  This  was  clearly  true  that  a  matter 
of  that  kind  could  not  be  disclosed  ex- 
cept by  divine  assistance.  It  would  seem 
from  this  that  these  persons  did  not  claim 
to  be  inspired,  or  to  have  communication 
with  the  gods ;  or,  at  least,  that  they  did 
not  claim  to  be  inspired  by  the  supreme 
God,  but  that  they  relied  on  their  own 
natural  sagacity,  and  their  careful  and 
long  study  of  the  meaning  of  those  oc- 
currences which  prefigured  future  evente, 
and  perhaps  on  the   mystic  arts  derived 


B.  C.  S03.] 


CHAPTER   IL 


121 


12  For  this  cause  the  king  was 
angry  and  very  furious,  and  com- 


from  their  acquaintance  with  science  as 
then  understood.  The  word  gods  here — 
|>nist  —  Elahin  [the  same  as  the  Ileb. 
Elohim],  is  in  the  plural  number,  but 
might  be  applied  to  the  true  God,  as  the 
Hebrew  Elohim  often  is.  It  is  by  no 
means  certain  that  they  meant  to  use  this 
in  the  plural,  or  to  say  that  it  was  an  ad- 
mitted truth  tliat  the  gods  worshipped  in 
Babylon  did  not  dwell  with  men.  It  was, 
undoubtedly,  the  common  opinion  that 
they  did ;  that  the  temples  were  their 
abode;  and  that  they  frequently  appeared 
among  men,  and  took  part  in  human 
riffiiirs.  But  it  was  a  very  early  opinion 
that  the  Supreme  God  was  withdrawn  from 
human  affairs,  and  had  committed  the 
government  of  the  world  to  intermediate 
beings  —  interiunicii  —  demons,  or  ajons  : 
beings  of  power  far  superior  to  that  of 
men,  who  constantly  mingled  in  human 
affairs.  Their  power,  however,  though 
great,  was  limited;  and  maj'  not  the  Chal- 
deans here  by  the  word  V-i^^  —  Elahin — 
have  meant  to  refer  to  the  Supreme  God, 
and  to  say  that  this  was  a  case  which 
pertained  to  him  alone ;  that  no  inferior 
divinity  could  be  competent  to  do  such  a 
thing  as  he  demanded;  and  that  as  the 
Supreme  God  did  not  dwell  among  men 
it  was  hopeless  to  attempt  to  explain  the 
matter?  Thus  understood  the  result  will 
convey  a  higher  trutli,  and  will  show 
more  impressively  the  honour  put  on 
Daniel.  The  phrase,  whose  dwelling  is 
not  with  flesh,  means  loith  men — in  human 
bodies.  On  the  supposition  that  this  refers 
to  the  Supreme  God,  this  undoubtedly 
accords  with  the  prevailing  sentiment  of 
those  times,  that  however  often  the  infe- 
rior divinities  might  appear  to  men,  and 
assume  human  forms,  yet  the  Supreme 
God  was  far  removed,  and  never  thus 
took  up  his  abode  on  the  earth.  They 
could  hope,  therefore,  for  no  communica- 
tion from  Him  who  alone  would  be  com- 
petent to  the  solution  of  such  a  secret  as 
this.  This  maybe  regarded,  therefore,  as 
a  frank  confession  of  their  entire  failure 
in  the  matter  under  consideration.  They 
acknowledged  that  they  themselves  were 
Uot  competent  to  the  solution  of  the 
iiuestion,  and  they  expressed  the  opinion 
that  the  ability  to  do  it  could  not  be  ob- 
11 


manded  to  destroy  ^  all  the  -wise  men 
of  Babylon. 


tained  from  the  help  which  the  inferior 
gods  rendered  to  men,  and  that  it  waa 
hopeless  to  expect  the  Supreme  God — far 
withdrawn  from  human  affairs — to  inter- 
pose. It  was  a  public  acknowledgment 
that  their  art  failed  on  a  most  important 
trial,  and  thus  the  way  was  prepared  to 
show  that  Daniel,  under  the  teaching  of 
the  true  God,  was  able  to  accomplish  what 
was  wholly  beyond  all  human  power. 
The  trial  had  been  fairly  made.  The 
wisest  men  of  the  Chaldean  realm  had 
been  applied  to.  They  on  whom  reliance 
had  been  placed  in  such  emergencies  ; 
they  who  professed  to  be  able  to  explain 
the  prognostics  of  future  events ;  they  wlio 
had  been  assembled  at  the  most  import- 
ant and  magnificent  court  of  the  world — 
the  very  centre  of  Pagan  power;  they 
who  had  devoted  their  lives  to  investiga- 
tions of  this  nature,  and  who  might  be 
supposed  to  be  competent  to  such  a  work, 
if  any  on  earth  could,  now  openly  ac- 
knowledged that  their  art  failed  them,  and 
expressed  the  conviction  that  there  was  no 
resource  in  the  case. 

12.  For  this  cause  the  king  was  angry. 
Because  they  failed  in  explaining  the 
subject  which  had  been  referred  to  them. 
It  is  true  that  his  anger  was  unjust:  for 
their  profession  did  not  imply  that  they 
would  undertake  to  explain  what  he  de- 
manded, but  his  wrath  was  not  unnatural. 
His  mind  was  alarmed,  and  he  was 
troubled.  He  believed  that  what  be  had 
seen  in  his  dream  foreboded  some  im- 
portant events,  and,  as  an  arbitrary  sove- 
reign, unaccustomed  to  restrain  his  anger, 
or  to  inquire  into  the  exact  justice  of  mat- 
ters which  excited  his  indignation,  it  was 
not  unnatural  that  he  should  resolve  to 
wreak  his  vengeance  *n  all  who  made  anj' 
pretensions  to  the  arts  of  divining.  ^  And 
very  furious.  AVrought  up  to  the  highest 
degree  of  passion.  Chal.  '  Much  enraged. 
It  was  not  a  calm  and  settled  purpose 
to  execute  his  threat,  but  a  purpose  at- 
tended with  a  high  degree  of  excitement. 
^^  And  commanded  to  destroy  all  the  wise 
men  of  Babylon.  That  is,  all  who  made 
pretensions  to  this  kind  of  wisdom  ;  all 
who  came  under  the  well-known  denomi- 
nation of  wise  men,  or  sages.  He  had 
called  that  class  before  him  (ver.  2) ;  he 
had  dfmandedof  them  an  explanation  of 


122 


13  And  the  decree  went  forth 
that  the  wise  men  should  be  slain  ; 
and  they  sought  Daniel  and  his  fel- 
lows to  be  slain. 

^  Reiarncd. 

his  dream ;  he  had  been  assured  by  the 
leading  men  among  them,  the  Chaldeans 
(vs.  10,  11),  that  they  could  not  recall  his 
dream,  and,  as  he  supposed  that  all  who 
could  bo  relied  on  in  such  a  case  had 
failed,  he  resolved  to  cut  them  off"  as  im- 
postors. Where  Daniel  was  at  this  time  is 
not  known.  It  would  seem,  however, 
that,  from  some  reason,  he  had  not  been 
summoned  before  the  king  with  the  others, 
probably  because,  although  he  had  shown 
himself  to  be  eminently  endowed  with 
wisdom  (ch.  i.  20),  he  had  not  yet  made 
any  pretensions  to  this  kind  of  knowledge, 
and  was  not  numbered  with  the  Magi,  or 
Chaldeans.  When,  however,  the  decree 
went  forth  that  all  the  '  wise  men  of 
Babylon '  should  be  slain,  the  exhibition 
of  wisdom  and  knowledge  made  by  him 
(ch.  i.  18-20)  was  recollected,  and  the 
executioners  of  the  sentence  supposed  that 
ho  and  his  companions  were  included  in 
the  general  instructions.  AYhether  the 
word  Babylon  here  relates  to  the  city  of 
Babylon,  or  to  the  whole  realm,  there  is 
no  certain  way  of  determining.  Consider- 
ing, however,  the  character  of  Oriental 
despotisms,  and  the  cruelty  to  which  ab- 
solute sovereigns  have  usually  been  trans- 
ported in  their  passion,  there  would  be  no 
improbability  in  supposing  that  the  com- 
mand included  the  whole  realm,  though  it 
is  probable  that  most  of  this  class  would 
be  found  in  the  capital. 

13.  And  the  decree  loent  forth  that  the 
wise  men  should  be  slain.  The  original 
here  will  bear  a  somewhat  different  trans- 
lation, meaning  '  the  decree  went  forth 
and  the  wise  men  were  slain ;'  that  is,  the 
execution  of  the  sentence  was  actually 
commenced.  So  the  Vulg.  £t  egresad 
sententid,  sapientes  interficiebantur.  So  also 
the  Greek  version,  Ka'i  ol  ao<poi  dwtKTtvvovTa 
— '  and  the  wise  men  were  slain.'  This 
seems  to  me  to  be  the  more  i^robable  in- 
terpretauon,  and  better  to  suit  the  con- 
nection. Then  it  would  mean  that  they 
had  actually  begun  to  execute  the  decree, 
and  that  in  the  prosecution  of  their  bloody 
work  they  sought  out  Daniel  and  his  com- 
panions, and  that  by  his  influence  with 
Arioch,  the  execution  of  the  sentence  was 
arrested.     ^  And  they  somjht  Daniel  and 


DANIEL.  [B.  C.  603 

14  f  Then  Daniel  *  answered  with 
counsel  and  wisdom  to  Arioch  the 
*>  captain  of  the  king's  guard,  which 

b  Clnrf  of  the  executioners,  or  slauglder-men, 
or  chief 'marshal ;  Ge.  37.  36;  Je  52.  VZ,  14. 


his  fellowa  to  he  slain.  His  three  com- 
panions (ch.  i.  6),  who  probably  had  not 
been  among  those  who  were  summoned  to 
court  to  explain  the  matter.  Had  they 
been  consulted  at  first  the  issuing  of  the 
decree  would  have  been  prevented,  but  it 
seems  to  have  been  the  design  of  Provi- 
dence to  give  the  fairest  trial  of  the  ability 
of  these  sages,  and  to  allow  matters  to 
come  to  a  crisis,  in  order  to  show  that 
what  was  done  was  wholly  beyond  human 
power. 

14.  Tlien  Daniel  answered.  Marg.  j-e- 
ttirned.  The  original  literally  is,  're- 
turned counsel  and  wisdom,'  meaning 
that  he  returned  an  answer  which  was 
replete  with  wisdom.  It  would  seem  pro- 
bable that  Arioch  had  communicated  to 
Daniel  the  decree  of  the  king,  and  b.ad 
stated  to  him  that  he  was  involved  in  that 
decree,  and  must  prepare  to  die.  ^  Coun- 
sel and  wisdom.  That  is,  wise  counsel. 
He  evinced  great  prudence  and  discretion 
in  what  he  said.  He  made  such  a  sug- 
gestion to  Arioch  as,  if  acted  on,  would 
stay  the  execution  of  the  sentence  against 
all  the  wise  men,  and  would  secure  the 
object  which  the  king  had  in  view.  AVhat 
was  the  exact  nature  of  this  answer  is 
not  mentioned.  It  is  probable,  however, 
that  it  was  that  he  might  be  enabled  to 
disclose  the  dream,  and  that  he  made  this 
so  plausible  to  Arioch,  that  he  was  dis- 
posed to  allow  him  to  make  the  trial.  It 
is  evident  that  Arioch  would  not  have 
consented  to  arrest  the  execution  of  the 
sentence,  unless  it  had  appeared  to  him 
to  be  in  the  highest  degree  probable  that 
he  would  be  able  to  relieve  the  anxiety 
of  the  king.  Knowing  that  the  main  ob- 
ject of  the  king  was  to  obtain  the  inter- 
pretation of  his  dream,  and  seeing  tha 
this  object  was  not  any  the  more  likely  to 
be  secured  by  the  execution  of  this  stern 
decree,  and  knowing  the  high  favour  with 
which  Daniel  had  been  received  at  court 
(ch.  i.  19-21),  he  seems  to  have  been 
willing  to  assume  some  measure  of  re- 
sponsibility, and  to  allow  Daniel  to  make 
his  own  representation  to  the  king.  ^  To 
Arioch,  the  captain  of  the  kiny'e  guard. 
Marg.  '  chief  of  the  ex^'^'i^t'owrs,  c 
slaiiyhter-men,  or  chief  mwakal'     (jlreek, 


B.  0.  603.] 


CHAPTEK   II. 


m 


was   gone   forth  to   slay   the   wise 
men  of  Bab^'lon : 

15  lie    answered    and    said    to 
Arioch  the  king's  captain,  AVhy  is 


apxiiiayelpoi  tou  (iaaiXcwi — chief  cotjic  of  the 
Jciiig.  The  Vulgate  renders  this,  '  Then 
Daniel  inquired  respecting  the  law  and 
the  sentence  of  Arioch,  the  commander 
of  the  royal  army.'  The  Chaldee  word 
rendered  guard,  is  ''*!!'?"J.  It  is  derived 
from  n3-j  —  tdhahh,  to  slaughter;  to  kill 
animals ;  and  then  to  kill  or  slay  men.  The 
noun  then  means  a  slaughterer  or  slayer ; 
a  cook;  an  executioner,  or  one  who  kills 
men  at  the  will  of  a  sovereign,  or  by  due 
sentence  of  law.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  the  word  here  refers  to  Arioch  as  sent 
out  to  execute  this  sentence ;  yet  we  are 
not  to  regard  him  as  a  mere  executioner, 
or  as  we  would  a  hangman,  for  undoubt- 
edly the  king  would  entrust  this  sentence 
to  one  who  was  of  respectable,  if  not  of 
high  rank.  It  is  probable  that  one  of  the 
principal  ofHcers  of  his  body-guard  would 
be  entrusted  with  the  execution  of  such  a 
sentence.  In  1  Sam.  viii.  13,  the  word  is 
rendered  cooks.  It  does  not  elsewhere 
occur.  That  he  was  not  a  mere  execu- 
tioner, is  apparent  from  the  title  given 
him  in  the  next  verse,  where  he  is  called 
'  the  king's  captain.'  ^  Which  was  gone 
forth  to  slay,  ifec.  He  had  gone  to  exe- 
cute the  decree,  and  its  execution  had 
already  commenced. 

15.  He  answered  and  said  to  Arioch,  the 
king's  captain.  The  word  captain — a  dif- 
ferent wordfrom  that  which  occurs  in  ver. 
14  —  ^^'^vi:' — denotes  one  who  has  rule  or 
dominion  ;  one  who  is  powerful  or  mighty ; 
and  it  would  be  applied  only  to  one  who 
sustained  a  post  of  honour  and  respon- 
sibility. See  the  use  of  the  word  'o^^' ,  as 
meaning  to  ride,  in  Neh.  v.  15  ;  Eccl.  ii. 
19,  vi.  2,  viii.  9;  Est.  ix.  1;  Ps.  exix.  133. 
The  word  here  used  is  the  same  which 
occurs  in  ver.  10,  where  it  is  rendered 
ruler.  It  doubtless  denotes  here  an  officer 
of  rank,  and  designates  one  of  more 
honourable  employment  than  would  be 
denoted  by  the  word  executioner.  It 
should  be  said  on  these  verses  (14,  15), 
however,  that  the  office  of  executioner  in 
the  East  wai3  by  no  means  regarded  as  a 
dishonourable  office.  It  was  entrusted  to 
those  high  in  rank,  and  even  nobles  con- 
lidcred  it  an  honour,  and  often  boasted 


the  decree  so  hasty  from  the  king? 
Then  Arioch  made  the  thing  known 
to  Daniel. 

IG  Then  Daniel  went  in,  and  do- 


of  it  as  such,  that  among  their  ancestors 
there  were  those  who  had  in  this  way 
been  entrusted  with  executing  the  com- 
mands of  their  sovereign.  Hanway  and 
Abdul-Kerim  both  say  that  this  office 
conferred  honour  and  rank.  Tourne- 
fort  says,  that  in  Georgia  "the  execu- 
tioners are  very  rich,  and  men  of  standing 
undertake  this  employment;  far  difierent 
from  what  occurs  in  other  parts  of  the 
world,  in  that  country  this  gives  to  a 
family  a  title  of  honour.  They  boast  that 
among  their  ancestors  there  were  many 
who  were  executioners ;  and  this  they 
base  on  the  sentiment,  that  nothing  is 
more  desirable  than  justice,  and  that  no- 
thing can  be  more  honourable  than  to  be 
engaged  in  administering  the  laws."  See 
Kosenmiiller,  Morgenland,  1079.  ^  Why 
is  the  decree  so  hasty  from  the  king?  Im- 
plying that  all  the  effort  had  not  been 
made  which  it  was  possible  to  make  tc 
solve  the  mj'stery.  The  idea  is,  that  a 
decree  of  such  a  nature,  involving  so 
many  in  ruin,  ought  not  to  have  pro- 
ceeded from  the  king  without  having 
taken  all  possible  precautions,  and  made 
all  possible  efforts  to  find  those  who 
might  be  able  to  disclose  what  the  king 
desired.  It  was  to  Daniel  a  just  matter 
of  surprise  that,  after  the  favour  and 
honour  with  which  he  had  been  received 
at  court  (ch.  i.  19,  20),  and  the  confidence 
which  had  been  reposed  in  him,  a  com- 
mand like  this  should  have  been  issued, 
so  comprehensive  as  to  embrace  him  and 
his  friends,  when  they  had  done  nothing 
to  deserve  the  displeasure  of  the  king. 
^  Then  Arioch  made  the  thing  knoion  to 
Baniel.  The  statement  respecting  the 
dream  ;  the  trouble  of  the  king ;  the  con- 
sultation of  the  magicians;  their  inability 
to  explain  the  dream,  and  the  positive 
command  to  put  all  the  pretenders  to  wis- 
dom to  death.  It  is  clear  that  Daniel  had 
not  before  been  informed  of  these  things. 
16.  Tlien  Daniel  ivent  in,  &c.  Either  by 
himself,  or  through  the  medium  of  some 
friend.  Perhaps  all  that  is  meant  is,  not 
that  he  actually  went  into  the  presence 
of  the  monarch,  but  that  he  went  into 
the  palace,  and  through  the  interposition 
of  some  high  officer  of  court  who  had 
access  to  the   sovereign,  desired  of  him 


124 


DANIEL 


[B.  C.  603. 


sired  of  the  king  that  he  would  give 
him  time,  and  that  he  -would  show 
the  king  the  interpretation. 

17  Then  Daniel  went  to  his  house, 
and  made  the  thing  known  to  Ilana- 

»  1  Sam.  17.  37  ;  c.  3. 17  ;  2  Tim.  4. 17,  IS. 

l"  From  before. 


that  he  would  give  him  time,  and  that  he 
would  make  it  known.  It  would  rather 
appear,  from  vs.  24,  25,  that  the  first 
direct  audience  which  he  had  with  the 
king  was  after  the  thing  was  made  known 
to  him  in  a  night  vision,  and  it  would 
scarcely  accord  with  established  Oriental 
usages  that  he  should  go  immediately  and 
unceremoniously  into  the  royal  presence. 
A  petition  presented  through  some  one  who 
had  access  to  the  king,  would  meet  all  the 
circumstances  of  the  case.  ^  2'/iat  he 
would  give  him  time.  He  did  not  specify 
wJn/  he  desired  time,  though  the  reason 
why  he  did  it  is  plain  enough.  He  wished 
to  lay  the  matter  before  God,  and  to 
engage  his  friends  in  earnest  prayer  that 
the  dream  and  the  interpretation  might 
be  made  known  to  him.  This  request 
was  granted  to  him.  It  may  seem  re- 
markable, as  no  time  was  allowed  to  the 
Chaldeans  that  they  might  make  inquiry 
(ver.  S),  that  such  a  favour  should  have 
been  granted  to  Daniel,  especially  after 
the  execution  of  the  sentence  had  been 
commenced ;  but  we  are  to  remember 
(1.)  That  the  king  would  recollect  the 
favour  which  he  had  already  shown 
Daniel  on  good  grovuids,  and  the  fact  that 
he  regarded  him  as  endowed  with  great 
wisdom,  ch.  i.  19,  20;  (2.)  Daniel  did  not 
ask,  as  the  Chaldeans  did,  that  the  king 
should  tell  the  dream  before  he  undertook 
to  explain  it,  but  he  proposed  evidently  to 
unfold  the  whole  matter;  (.".)  it  could  not 
but  occur  to  the  king  that  Daniel  had  not 
yet  been  consulted,  and  that  it  was  but 
reasonable  that  he  should  have  a  fair 
trial  now,  since  it  appeared  that  he  was 
involved  in  the  general  sentence;  (4.)  the 
anxiety  of  the  king  to  understand  the 
dream  was  so  great  that  he  was  willing  to 
grasp  at  any  hope  in  order  that  his  per- 
plexities might  be  relieved;  and  (5.)  it  is 
not  improper  to  suppose  that  there  may 
have  been  a  divine  influence  on  the  mind 
of  this  monarch,  making  him  willing  to 
do  so  simple  an  act  of  justice  as  this,  in 
Vrder  that  it  might  be  seen  and  ucknow- 


niah,    Mishael,   and    Azariah,    hit 
companions : 

18  That  a  they  would  desire  mer- 
cies •'of  the  God  of  heaven  concern- 
ing this  secret ;  <:  that  Daniel  and 
his  fellows  should  not  perish  with 
"=  Or,  they  should  not  destroy  Daniel. 


ledged  that  the  hand  of  God  was  in  the 
whole  matter. 

17.  Then  Daniel  loent  to  his  house.  It 
is  quite  evident  that  he  had  obtained  the 
object  of  his  request,  though  this  is  not 
expressly  mentioned.  The  king  was  un- 
doubtedly, for  the  reasons  above  stated, 
willing  that  he  should  have  a  fair  oppor- 
tunity to  try  his  skill  in  disclosing  the 
mysterious  secret.  ^  And  made  the  thing 
known  to  JIananiah,  &c.  Made  the  Avhole 
matter  known — the  perplexitj'  respecting 
the  dream ;  the  failure  of  the  Chaldeana 
to  interpret  it ;  the  decree ;  and  his  own 
petition  to  the  king.  They  had  a  com- 
mon interest  in  knowing  it,  as  their  lives 
were  all  endangered. 

IS.  That  they  would  desire  mercies  of 
the  God  of  heaven,  concerning  this  secret. 
That  they  would  implore  of  God  that  ho 
would  show  Ills  mercy  to  them  in  reveal- 
ing this  secret,  that  their  lives  might  be 
spared.  In  the  margin,  as  in  the  Chaldee, 
this  is  'from  before  the  God  of  heaven.' 
All  depended  now  on  God.  It  was  clear 
that  human  skill  was  exhausted,  and  that 
no  reliance  could  he  placed  on  any  ability 
which  man  possessed.  The  art  of  the 
Chaldeans  had  failed,  and  Daniel,  as  well 
by  this  failure  as  by  the  promptings  of 
his  own  feelings,  must  now  have  perceived 
that  the  only  hope  was  in  God,  and  that 
his  favour  in  the  case  was  to  be  obtained 
only  by  prayer.  As  his  three  friends 
were  equally  interested  in  the  issue,  and 
as  it  was  an  early  principle  of  religion, 
and  one  found  in  all  dispensations  (comp. 
Matt,  xviii.  19),  that  united  prayer  has 
special  power  with  God,  it  was  natural  and 
proper  to  call  on  his  friends  to  join  with 
him  in  asking  this  favour  from  Him  who 
alone  could  grant  it.  It  was  the  natural, 
and  the  last  resource  of  piety,  furnishing 
an  example  of  what  all  may  do,  and 
should  do,  in  times  of  perplexity  and 
danger.  ^  That  Daniel  and  his  felloios 
should  not  jierish.  Marg.,  'or,  they  should 
not  destroy  Daniel.'  The  reading  in  the 
margin  is  most  in  accordance  with  the 
Chaldee,  though  the  sense  is  substantiaDy 


B.C.  G03.] 


CHAPTER  IL 


\S& 


the  rest  of  the  wise  men  of  Baby- 
lon. 

19  Then  -was  the  secret  revealed 
unto  Daniel  in  a  night  ^vision. 
Then  Daniel  blessed  the  God  of 
heaven. 

a  Num.  12.  0.  b  Ps.  50.  23. 


20  Daniel  answered  and  said, 
''Blessed  he  the  name  of  God  for 
ever  and  ever :  for  <^  ■wisdom  and 
might  are  his  : 

21  And  he  changeth  the  ^  times 
and  the  seasons :  he  "  removeth 
■^Jer.  32.19.        d  Ps.  31.  U,  15.        =Ps.75.  G,7. 


the  same.  The  vrord  fellows  is  the  same 
which  is  before  rendered  coitqianions. 
^  With  the  rest  of  the  wise  men  of  Bahylun. 
It  seems  to  have  been  certain  that  the 
decree  would  be  executed  on  the  Chal- 
deans, soothsaj'ers,  <tc.  And,  indeed, 
there  was  no  reason  why  the  decree  should 
not  be  executed.  They  had  confessed 
their  inability  to  comply  with  the  king's 
command,  and  whatever  Daniel  could  now 
do  could  not  be  construed  in  their  favour 
as  furnishing  any  reason  why  the  decree 
should  not  be  executed  on  them.  It  was 
presumed,  therefore,  that  the  law,  severe 
as  it  seemed  to  be,  would  be  carried  into 
etfcct  on  them,  and  we  may  suppose  that 
this  was  probably  done.  The  only  hope 
of  their  escaping  from  the  common  lot  was 
in  the  belief  that  the  God  whom  they 
served  would  now  interpose  in  their 
behalf. 

19.  Then  was  the  secret  revealed,  <tc. 
To  wit,  the  dream  and  the  interpretation. 
The  thing  which  had  been  hidden  was 
disclosed.  We  may  suppose  that  this  oc- 
cui-red  after  a  suitable  time  had  been 
given  to  pra3'er.  ^  In  a  niyht  vision. 
A  representation  made  to  him  at  night, 
but  whether  when  he  was  asleep  or  awake 
does  not  appear.  Comp.  Notes  on  ch.  i. 
17;  Isa.  i.  1;  Job  iv.  13,  xxxiii.  15. 
•[  Then  Daniel  blessed  the  God  of  heaven. 
Nothing  would  be  more  natural  than  that 
he  should  burst  forth  in  a  song  of  grateful 
praise  for  disclosing  a  secret,  by  means  of 
which  his  life,  and  the  lives  of  his  com- 
panions, would  be  preserved,  and  by  which 
such  signal  honour  would  redound  to  God 
himself,  as  alone  able  to  reveal  coming 
events. 

20.  Daniel  answered  and  said.  The 
word  'answer,'  in  the  Scriptures,  often 
occurs  substantially  in  the  sense  of  speak 
or  say.  It  does  not  always  denote  a  reply 
to  something  that  has  been  said  hy  an- 
other, as  it  does  witb  us,  but  is  often  used 
when  a  speech  is  commenced,  as  if  one 
were  replying  to  something  that  mi<jht  be 
Baid  in  the  case,  or  as  meaning  that  the 
♦ircumstances  in  the  case  gave  rise  to  the 

11* 


remark.  Here  the  meaning  is,  that  Daniel 
responded,  as  it  were,  to  the  goodness 
which  God  had  manifested,  and  gave 
utterance  to  his  feelings  in  appropriate 
expressions  of  praise.  ^  Blessed  he  the 
name  of  God  for  ever  and  ever.  That 
is,  blessed  bo  God  —  the  name,  in  the 
Scriptures,  being  often  used  to  denote 
the  person  himself.  It  is  common  in 
the  Bible  to  utter  .ascriptions  of  praise 
to  God  in  view  of  important  revelations, 
or  in  view  of  great  mercies.  Comp.  the 
gong  of  Moses  after  the  passage  of  the 
Red  Sea,  Ex.  xv. ;  the  song  of  Deborah 
after  the  overthrow  of  Sisera,  Judg.  v.  and 
xii.  ^  For  wisdom  and  mif/ht  are  his. 
Both  these  were  manifested  in  a  remark- 
able manner  in  the  circumstances  of  this 
case,  and  thei-efore  these  were  the  begin- 
nings of  the  song  of  praise  :  wisdom,  as 
now  imparted  to  Daniel,  en.abling  him  to 
disclose  this  secret,  when  all  human  skiU 
had  failed;  and  might,  as  about  to  be 
evinced  in  the  changes  of  empire  indicated 
by  the  dream  and  the  interpretation. 
Comp.  Jer.  xxxii.  19,  "  Great  in  counsel, 
and  mighty  in  work." 

21.  And  he  changeth  the  times  and  the 
seasons.  The  object  of  this  is  to  assert 
the  general  control  of  God  in  reference  to 
all  changes  which  occur.  The  assertion 
is  made,  undoubtedly,  in  view  of  the  re- 
volutions in  empire  which  Daniel  now 
saw,  from  the  signification  of  the  dream, 
were  to  take  place  under  the  divine  hand. 
Foreseeing  now  these  vast  changes  de- 
noted by  different  parts  of  the  image  (vs. 
36-45),  stretching  into  far-distant  timeSj 
Daniel  was  led  to  ascribe  to  God  the  con- 
trol over  all  the  revolutions  which  occur 
on  e.arth.  There  is  no  essential  differenco 
between  the  words  times  and  seasons. 
The  words  in  Chaldee  denote  stated  or 
appointed  seasons  ;  and  the  idea  of  times 
appointed,  set,  determined,  enters  into 
both.  Times  and  seasons  are  not  under 
the  control  of  chance,  but  are  bounded  by 
est;iblished  laws ;  and  yet  God,  who  ap- 
pointed these  laws,  has  power  to  change 
them,  and  all  the  changes  which  occur 


12G 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  003, 


kings,    and   setteth   up   kings :    he    knowledge  to  them  that  know  un^ 


igiveth  wisdom  unto  the  wise,  and 

*  Prov.  2.  6, 


under  those  laws  are  produced  by  his 
agency.  Thus  the  changes  which  occur 
in  regard  to  day  and  night,  spring  and 
Bummer,  autumn  and  winter,  clouds  and 
sunshine,  health  and  sickness,  childhood 
and  youth,  manhood  and  age,  are  under 
his  control.  Such  changes,  being  in  ac- 
cordance with  certain  laws,  may  ,be  re- 
garded as  cfjypointed,  or  act,  and  yet  the 
laws  and  the  revolutions  consequent  on 
them  are  all  under  his  control.  So  in 
regard  to  the  revolutions  of  empire. 
By  the  arrangements  of  his  providence 
he  secures  such  revolutions  as  he  shall 
see  it  to  be  best  should  occur,  and  in  all 
of  them  his  high  Iiand  should  be  regarded. 
The  words  seasons  and  times  are  of  fre- 
quent occurrence  in  Daniel,  and  are 
sometimes  used  in  a  peculiar  sense  (see 
Notes  on  ch.  vii.  12,  25),  but  they  seem 
here  to  be  employed  in  their  usual  and 
general  signification,  to  denote  that  all 
the  revolutions  which  occur  on  earth  are 
under  his  control.  ^  He  rcmoveth  kings, 
and  setteth  vp  kings.  He  has  absolute 
control  over  all  the  sovereigns  of  the 
earth,  to  place  on  the  throne  whom  he 
will,  and  to  remove  them  when  he  pleases. 
This  was  doubtless  suggested  to  Daniel, 
and  was  made  the  foundation  of  this  por- 
tion of  his  hymn  of  praise,  from  what  he 
was  permitted  to  see  in  the  disclosures 
made  to  him  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
dream,  lie  then  saw  (comp.  vs.  37-45), 
that  there  would  be  most  important  revo- 
lutions of  kingdoms  under  the  hand  of 
Ood,  and  being  deeply  impressed  with 
these  great  prospective  changes,  he  makes 
this  general  statement,  that  it  was  the 
prerogative  of  God  to  do  this  at  pleasure. 
Nebuchadnezzar  was  brought  to  feel  this, 
and  to  recognize  it,  when  he  said  (ch.  iv. 
17),  "The  Most  High  ruleth  in  the  king- 
dom of  men  and  giveth  it  to  whomsoever 
he  will ;"  "  he  doeth  according  to  his  will  in 
the  army  of  heaven,  and  among  the  inha- 
bitants of  the  earth  ;  none  can  stay  his 
hand,  or  say  unto  him.  What  doestthou  ?" 
ch.  iv.  32,  35.  This  claim  is  often  asserted 
for  God  in  the  Scriptures  as  a  proof  of  his 
supremacy  and  greatness.  "  For  promo- 
tion Cometh  neither  from  the  east,  nor 
from  the  west,  nor  from  the  south :  but 
God  is  the  judge;  he  putteth  down  one, 
tad  setteth  up  another."    Ps.  Ixxv.  6,  7. 


derstandina:; 


Comp.  1  Sam.  ii.  7,  S.  Thus  he  claimeij 
absolute  control  over  Sennacherib  to 
emi^loy  him  at  his  pleasure  in  executing 
his  purposes  of  punishment  on  the  He- 
brew nation  (Isa.  x.  5-7),  and  thus  over 
Cyrus  to  execute  his  purposes  on  Baby- 
lon, and  to  restore  his  people  to  their 
land.  Isa.  xlv.  1,  seq.  See  also  Isa.  xlvi. 
10,  11.  In  this  manner,  all  the  kings  of 
the  earth  may  be  regarded  as  under  hia 
control;  and  if  the  divine  plan  was  fully 
understood  it  would  be  found  that  each 
one  has  received  his  appointment,  under 
the  divine  direction,  to  accomplish  some 
important  part  in  carrying  forward  the 
divine  plans  to  their  fiilfiUment.  A  his- 
tory of  human  affairs,  showing  the  exact 
purpose  of  God  in  regard  to  each  ruler 
who  has  occupied  a  throne,  and  the  exact 
object  which  God  designed  to  accomplish 
by  placing  Mm  on  the  throne  at  the  time 
when  he  did,  would  be  a  far  more  im- 
portant and  valuable  history  than  any 
which  has  been  written.  Of  many  such 
rulers,  like  Cyrus,  Sennacherib,  Pilate, 
Henry  VIII.,  Edward  VI.,  and  the  Elec- 
tor of  Saxony,  we  can  see  the  reason  why 
they  lived  and  reigned  when  they  did; 
and  doubtless  God  has  had  some  im- 
portant end  to  accomplish  in  the  develop- 
ment of  his  great  plans  in  the  case  of 
every  one  who  has  ever  occupied  a  throne. 
^  He  giveth  wisdom  unto  the  xoise,  &c.  He 
is  the  source  of  all  true  wisdom  and  know- 
ledge. This  is  often  claimed  for  God  in 
the  Scriptures.     Comp.  Prov.  ii.  6,  7 : 

"  For  the  Lord  giveth  wisdom ; 
Out  of  his  mouth   cometh   knowledge  and 

understanding. 
lie  layeth  up  sound  wisdom  for  the  riglitoous; 
lie  is  a  buckler  to  them  that  walk  uprightly." 

See  also  1  Kings  iii.  9-12 ;  Ex.  xxxi.  3. 
God  claims  to  be  the  source  of  all  wisdom 
and  knowledge.  Ho  originally  formed 
each  human  intellect,  and  made  it  what 
it  is ;  he  opens  before  it  the  paths  of 
knowledge ;  he  gives  to  it  clearness  of 
perception;  he  preserves  its  powers  so 
that  they  do  not  become  der.anged;  he 
has  power  to  make  suggestions,  to  direct 
the  laws  of  association,  to  fix  the  mind  oq 
important  thoughts,  and  to  open  before  it 
new  and  interesting  views  of  truth.  And 
as  it  would  be  found,  if  the  history  coul<] 
be  written,   that   God  has    placed   each 


li.  C.  603.] 


CHAPTER  II 


127 


22  He  revealeth  »the  deep  and 
secret  things  :  he  knoweth  ^  what  is 
in  the  darkness,  and  the  liirht  >=  dwel- 
leth  with  him. 


monarch  on  the  throne  with  a  distinct 
reference  to  some  important  purpose  in 
the  development  of  his  great  plans,  so 
probably  it  would  be  seen  that  each  im- 
portant work  of  genius  which  has  been 
written ;  each  invention  in  the  arts ;  and 
each  discovery  in  science,  has  been,  for  a 
similar  purpose,  under  his  control.  He 
has  created  the  great  intellect  just  at  the 
time  when  it  was  needful  that  such  a  dis- 
covery or  invention  should  be  made,  and 
having  prepared  the  world  for  it  by  the 
course  of  events,  the  discovery  or  inven- 
tion has  occurred  just  at  the  time  when, 
on  the  whole,  it  was  most  desirable  that 
it  should. 

22.  He  revealeth  the  deep  and  secret 
things.  Things  which  are  too  profound 
for  man  to  fathom  by  his  own  power,  and 
which  are  concealed  or  hidden  until  he 
makes  them  known.  What  is  said  here 
is  an  advance  on  what  was  affirmed  in  the 
previous  verse,  and  relates  to  another 
kind  of  knowledge.  That  related  to  such 
knowledge  as  was  not  properly  beyond 
the  grasp  of  the  human  intellect  when  un- 
aided in  any  supernatural  manner,  and 
affirmed  that  even  then  all  discoveries  and 
inventions  are  to  be  traced  to  God ;  this 
refers  to  a  species  of  knowledge  which 
lies  beyond  any  natural  compass  of  the 
human  powers,  and  in  which  a  super- 
natural influence  is  needed  —  such  things 
as  the  Chaldeans  and  astrologers  claimed 
the  power  of  disclosing.  The  assertion 
here  is,  that  when  the  highest  human 
wisdom  showed  itself  insufficient  for  the 
exigency,  God  was  able  to  disclose  those* 
deep  truths  which  it  was  desirable  for  man 
to  understand.  Applied  generally,  this 
refers  to  the  truths  made  known  by  revela- 
tion— truths  which  man  could  never  have 
discovered  by  his  unaided  powers.  ^  He 
hnoiceth  tchat  is  in  the  darkness.  What 
appears  to  man  to  be  involved  in  dark- 
ness, and  on  which  no  light  seems  to 
shine.  This  may  refer  not  only  to  what 
is  concealed  from  man  in  the  literal  dark- 
ness of  night,  but  to  all  that  is  mj-sterious  ; 
all  that  lies  beyond  the  range  of  human 
inquiry;  all  that  pertains  to  unseen 
worlds.  An  immensely  large  portion  of 
the  universe  lies  wholly  beyond  the  range  i 


23  I  thank  thee,  and  praise  thee, 

0  thou  God  of  my  fathers,  who  hast 
given  me  wisdom  and   might,  and 

»  Ps.  25.  14.        b  Ps.  1.39.  n.  12;  ifeb.  4.  13. 
cl  Tim.  6.  16;  IJolm  1.6. 

of  human  investigation  at  present,  and  is, 
of  course,  dark  to  man.  IT  And  the  light 
dwelleth  with  him.  The  word  rendered 
dwelleth — i^'}''^ — means  properly  to  loose, 
to  unbind,  to  solve,  as  e.  g.,  hard  ques- 
tions, Dan.  V.  16;  and  is  then  applied  to 
travellers  who  unbind  the  loads  of  their 
beasts  to  put  up  for  the  night,  and  then 
it  comes  to  mean  to  put  up  for  the  night, 
to  lodge,  to  dwell.  Hence  the  meaning 
is,  that  the  light  abides  with  God;  it  is 
there  as  in  its  appropriate  dwelling-place ; 
he  is  in  the  midst  of  it;  all  is  light  about 
him ;  light  when  it  is  sent  out  goes  from 
him ;  when  it  is  gathered  together  its  ap- 
propriate place  is  with  him.  Comp.  Job 
xxxviii.  19,  20 : 

"  Where  is  the  way  where  light  dwelleth? 
And    as  for  darkness   where  is    the  place 

thereof? 
That  thou  shouldest   take  it  to  the  bound 

thereof. 
And  that  thou  shouldest  know  the  paths  to 

the  house  thereof?" 

See  Notes  on  that  passage.     Comp.  also, 

1  Tim.  i.  16:  "Dwelling  in  the  light 
which  no  man  can  approach  unto." 
1  John  i.  5  :  "  God  is  hght,  and  in  him  la 
no  darkness  at  alL" 

23.  /  thank  thee,  and  praise  thee,  0 
thou  God  of  my  fathers.  By  his  "  fathers" 
here,  Daniel  refers  doubtless  to  the  Jew- 
ish  people  in  general,  and  not  to  his  own 
particular  ancestors.  The  meaning  of 
the  phrase  "God  of  my  fathers,"  is,  that 
he  had  been  their  protector;  had  regarded 
them  as  his  people ;  had  conferred  on 
them  great  favours.  The  particular 
ground  of  thanksgiving  here  is,  that  the 
same  God  who  had  so  often  revealed  him- 
self to  the  Hebrew  people  by  the  prophets 
in  their  own  land,  had  now  condescended 
to  do  the  same  thing  to  one  of  their 
nation,  though  a  captive  in  a  strange 
country.  The  favour  thus  bestowed  had 
an  increased  value  from  the  fact  that  it 
showed  that  the  Hebrew  people  were  not 
forgotten,  though  far  from  the  land  of 
their  birth,  and  that  though  in  captivity 
they  might  still  hope  for  the  benign  inter, 
position  of  God.  ^  Who  hast  given  m« 
wisdom  and  might.     The  word  '  wisdom' 


128 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  6oa 


hast  made  known  unto  me  now 
\Yhat  we  desired  of  thee :  for  thou 
flast  now  made  known  unto  us  the 
king's  matter. 

24  f  Therefore  Daniel  went  in 
unto  Arioch,  whom  the  king  had 
ordained  to  destroy  the  wise  rnen 
of   Babylon ;     he    went    and    said 


here  undoubtedly  refers  to  the  ability 
which  had  now  been  given  him  to  declare 
the  nature  and  purport  of  the  dream,  im- 
parting to  him  a  degree  of  wisdom  far 
superior  to  those  pretenders  to  whom  the 
matter  had  been  at  first  submitted.  The 
word  'might'  (Chald.  streiir/th — Nn-\i3:i) — 
does  not  probably  differ  materially  from 
'  xcisdom.'  It  means  ahility  io  interpret 
the  dream — impl3'ing  that  it  was  a  task  be- 
yond natural  human  ability.  ^  For  thou 
hast  now  made  hnoion  unto  vs  the  kind's 
matter.  That  is,  it  had  been  made  known 
to  him  and  his  friends.  lie  joins  himself 
with  them ;  for  although  it  was  particu- 
larly made  known  to  him,  yet,  as  thoy  had 
united  with  him  in  prayer  that  the  secret 
might  bo  disclosed,  and  as  they  shared 
common  dangers,  he  regarded  it  as  in 
fact  made  known  to  them  all. 

24.  There/ore  Daniel  went  in  v.nto 
Arioch.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  the 
matter  was  now  disclosed  to  him,  he  pro- 
posed to  lay  it  before  the  king.  This,  of 
course,  he  did  not  do  directly,  but  through 
Arioch,  who  was  entrusted  with  the  exe- 
cution of  the  decree  to  slay  the  wise  men 
of  Babylon.  That  officer  would  natur- 
ally have  access  to  the  king,  and  it  was 
proper  that  a  proposal  to  arrest  the  exe- 
cution of  the  sentence   should  be  made 


thus  unto  him  :  Destroy  not  th« 
Avise  men  of  Babylon  :  bring  me  in 
before  the  king,  and  I  will  sho-rt 
unto  the  king  the  interpretation. 

25  Then  Arioch  brought  in  Daniel 
before  the  king  in  haste,  and  said 
thus  unto  him,  »  I  have  found  a  mac 

=■  That  I. 


was  that  they  could  not  interpret  tha 
dream.  As  the  execution  of  the  sentenca 
involved  Daniel  and  his  friends,  and  aa 
the  reason  why  it  was  passed  at  all  would 
now  cease  by  his  being  .able  to  furnish 
the  required  explanation,  Daniel  felt  that 
it  was  a  matter  of  mere  justice  that  the 
execution  of  the  sentence  should  cease 
altogether.  ^  Bring  me  -in  before  the 
Icing.  It  would  seem  from  tliis  that 
Daniel  did  not  regard  himself  as  having 
free  access  to  the  king,  and  he  would  not 
unceremoniously  intrude  himself  into  his 
presence.  This  verse  confirms  the  inter- 
pretation given  of  ver.  16,  and  makes  it 
in  the  highest  degree  probable  that  thia 
was  the  first  occasion  on  which  he  was 
personally  before  the  king  in  reference  to 
this  matter. 

25.  Then  Arioch  hrottght  in  Daniel  he/ore 
the  king  in  haste.  The  Chaldee  word  used 
here  implies  in  tumultuous  haste,  as  of  one 
who  was  violently  excited,  or  in  a  state  of 
trepidation,  from  '^C!?  —  to  tremble,  to  he 
in  trcjndation.  The  trepidation  in  this 
case  may  have  arisen  from  one  or  both  of 
two  causes:  (1.)  exultation,  or  joy,  that 
the  great  secret  was  discovered  ,•  or 
(2.)  joy  that  the  effusion  of  blood  might 
be  stayed,  and  that  there  might  be  now 
no  necessity  to  continue  the  execution  of 


through  his  instrumentality.  The  Chaldee    the  sentence  against  the  wise  men.     ^  J 
—  n;"]S5|"5-'?3 — is  properly  'on  this  wholol''«'^'e/""»c^  «  man.     Marg.  as  in  Chaldee, 


account' — or,  'on  this  whole  account  be- 
cause'— in  accordance  with  the  usually 
full  and  pleonastic  mode  of  writing  par- 
ticles, similar  to  the  Gorman  alldietceil, 
or  the  compound  English  forasmuch  as. 
The  meaning  is,  that  in  view  of  the  whole 
matter,  he  sought  to  lay  the  case  before 
the  king,  f  Destroy  not  the  wise  men  of 
Babylon.  That  is,  '  Stay  the  execution 
of  the  sentence  on  them.  Though  they 
have  failed  to  furnish  the  interpretation 
demanded,  yet  as  it  con  now  be  given, 
there  is  no  occasion  for  the  exei-cise  of 
Ihis  severity.'    The  ground  of  the  sentence 


That  I  have  found  a  man.'  It  is  not  to 
be  supposed  that  Arioch  had  known  any- 
thing of  the  application  which  Daniel  had 
made  to  the  king  to  delaj'  the  executioii 
of  the  sentence  (ver.  16),  and  for  any- 
thing that  appears  he  had  suspended  that 
execution  on  his  own  responsibility.  Ig- 
norant as  he  was,  therefore,  of  .any  such 
arrangement,  and  viewing  only  his  own 
agency  in  the  matter,  it  was  natural  for 
him  to  go  in  and  announce  this  as  some- 
thing entirely  new  to  the  king,  and  with- 
out suggesting  that  the  execution  of  the 
sentence  had  been  at  all  delayed.  It  was 
a  most  remarkable  circumstance,  and  one 


B.  C.  603.] 


CHAPTER   II. 


of  the  ^  captives  of  Judah,  that  will 
make  known  unto  the  king  the  in- 
terpretation. 

26  The  king  answered  and  said 
to  Daniel,  whose  name,  teas  Belte- 
shazzar,  Art  thou  able  to  make 
known  unto  me  the  dream  which  I 
have  seen,  and  the  interpretation 
thereof? 

=^  Children  of  the  captivit'j. 


which  looks  like  a  divine  interposition, 
that  he  should  have  been  disposed  to 
delay  the  execution  of  the  sentence  at  all, 
60  that  Daniel  could  have  an  opportunity 
of  showing  whether  he  could  not  divulge 
the  secret.  All  the  circumstances  of  the 
case  seem  to  imply  that  Arioch  was  not  a 
man  of  a  cruel  disposition,  but  was  dis- 
posed, as  far  as  possible,  to  prevent  the 
efiFusion  of  blood.  \  Of  the  captives  of 
Judah.  Marg.  as  in  Chald.  'of  the  child- 
ren of  the  captivit}'.'  The  word  Judah 
here  probably  refers  to  the  country  rather 
than  to  the  people,  and  means  that  he  was 
among  those  who  had  been  brought  from 
the  land  of  Judah.  ^  That  will  make 
Icnoicn  unto  the  Icing  the  interi^retation. 
It  is  clear,  from  the  whole  narrative,  that 
Arioch  had  great  confidence  in  Daniel. 
All  the  evidence  which  he  could  have  that 
he  would  be  able  to  make  this  known, 
must  have  been  from  the  fact  that  Daniel 
professed  to  be  able  to  do  it ;  but  such  was 
his  confidence  in  him  that  he  had  no 
doubt  that  he  would  be  able  to  do  it. 

26.  The  king  answered,  and  said  to 
Daniel,  lohose  name  was  Belteshazzar. 
Notes,  ch.  i.  7.  The  king  may  have  ad- 
dressed him  by  this  name,  and  probably 
did  during  this  interview.  This  was  the 
name,  it  would  seem,  by  which  he  was 
known  in  Babylon — a  name  which  impliedr 
honour  and  respectability,  as  being  con- 
ferred on  one  whom  it  was  supposed  the 
principal  Babylonian  divinity  favoured. 
5[  Art  thou  able  tomake  known  unto  me  the 
dream  f  One  of  the  first  points  in  the 
diflBculty  was  to  recall  the  dream  itself, 
and  hence  this  was  the  first  inquiry  which 
the  king  presented.  If  he  could  not  re- 
call that,  of  course  the  matter  was  at  an 
end,  and  the  law  would  be  suffered  to 
take  its  course. 

27.  Daniel  answered  in  the  presence  of 
the  king,  and  said.  The  secret  lohich  the 
king  hath  demanded,  cannot  the  wise  men, 
tc,  show  unto  the  king  ?    Daniel  regarded 


27  Daniel  answered  in  the  pre- 
sence of  the  king,  and  said,  The 
secret  which  the  king  hath  de- 
manded cannot  "^  the  wise  men,  the 
astrologers,  the  magicians,  the  sooth- 
sayers, show  unto  the  king  ; 

28  But  <=  there  is  a  God  in  heaven 
that  revealeth  secrets,  and  ''  maketh 

b  Is.  47.13, 14  c  Gen.  40.  8,  41. 16. 

d  Sath  made. 


it  as  a  settled  and  indisputable  point  that 
the  solution  could  not  be  hoped  for  from 
the  Chaldean  sages.  The  highest  talent 
whic^i  the  realm  could  furnish  had  been 
applied  to,  and  had  failed.  It  was  clear, 
therefore,  that  there  was  no  hope  that  the 
difficulty  would  be  removed  by  human 
skill.  Besides  this,  Daniel  would  seem 
also  to  intimate  that  the  thing,  from  tho 
necessity  of  the  case,  was  beyond  tho 
compass  of  the  human  powers.  Alike  in 
reference  to  the  question  whether  a  for- 
gotten dream  could  be  recalled,  and  to  tha 
actual  signification  of  a  dream  so  remark- 
able as  this,  the  whole  matter  was  beyond 
the  ability  of  man.  ^  The  wise  men,  the 
astrologers,  &c.  On  these  words  see  Notes 
on  ch.  i.  20.  All  these  words  occur  in 
that  verse,  except  Vlli — Gozrin — rendered 
soothsayers.  This  is  derived  from  ^1\j 
to  cut,  to  cut  off;  and  then  to  decide,  to 
determine ;  and  it  is  thus  applied  to  those 
who  decide  or  determine  the  fates  or 
destiny  of  men;  that  is,  those  who  "by 
casting  nativities  from  the  place  of  the 
stars  at  one's  birth,  and  by  various  arts 
of  computing  and  divining,  foretold  the 
fortunes  and  destinies  of  individuals." 
See  Gesenius,  Com.  z.  Isai.  ii.  349-.356, 
^  4,  Von  den  Chaldern  und  deren  Astro- 
logie.  On  p.  555,  he  has  given  a  figure, 
showing  how  the  heavens  were  cut  up,  or 
divided,  by  astrologers  in  the  practice  of 
their  art.  Comp.  the  phrase  numeri  Baby- 
lonii,  in  Hor.  Carm.  I.  ii.  2.  The  Greek  is 
■^a(,apT}t><2i/  —  the  Chaldce  word  in  Greek 
letters.  This  is  one  of  the  words  —  not 
very  few  in  number  —  which  the  authors 
of  the  Greek  version  did  not  attempt  to 
translate.  Such  words,  however,  are  not 
useless,  as  they  serve  to  throw  light  on 
the  question  how  the  Hebrew  and  Chaldee 
were  pronounced  before  the  vowel  points 
were  affixed  to  those  languages. 

28.  But   there  is   a  God  in  heaven   that 
reveahth    -vxrets.     One   of  the   principal 


130 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  GOa. 


known  to  the  king  Nebuchadnezzar 
what  shall  be  in  the  latter  days. 
Thy  dream,  and  the  visions  of  thy 
head  upon  thy  bed,  are  these ; 
29  As  for  thee,  0  king,  thy 
a  Came  up. 


thoughts  came  » into  tliy  mind  upon 
thy  bed,  what  should  come  to  pasa 
hereafter :  and  ^  he  that  revealeth 
secrets  maketh  known  to  thee  what 
shall  come  to  pass. 

b  Amos  4. 13. 


i»bjects  contemplated  in  all  that  occurred 
respecting  (his  dream  and  its  interpreta- 
tion, was,  ti'  direct  the  mind  of  the  mo- 
narch to  the  true  God,  and  to  secure  the 
acknowledgment  of  his  supremacy.  Hence 
it  was  so  ordered  that  those  who  were  most 
eminent  for  wisdom,  and  who  were  re- 
garded as  the  favourites  of  heaven,  were 
constrained  to  confess  their  entire  in- 
ability to  explain  the  mystery.  The  way 
was  thus  prepared  to  show  that  he  who 
could  do  this  must  be  the  true  God,  and 
must  bo  worthy  of  adoration  and  praise. 
Thus  prepared,  the  mind  of  the  monarch 
was  now  directed  by  this  pious  Hebrew 
youth,  though  a  captive,  to  a  truth  so 
momentous  and  important.  His  whole 
training;  luj  modesty,  and  his  piety,  all 
were  combined  to  lead  him  to  attribute 
whatever  skill  he  might  evince  in  so  diffi- 
cult a  matter  to  the  true  God  alone  :  and 
we  can  scarcely  conceive  of  a  more  sub- 
lime object  of  contemplation  than  this 
young  man,  in  the  most  magnificent 
court  of  the  world,  directing  the  thoughts 
of  the  most  mighty  monarch  that  then 
occupied  a.  throne,  to  the  existence  and 
the  perfections  of  the  true  God.  ^  And 
mahethknoion  to  the  king NehueJiadnezzar. 
M.arg.  hath  made.  The  translation  in  the 
text  is  more  correct,  for  it  was  not  true 
that  he  had  as  j'ot  actually  made  these 
things  known  to  the  king.  He  had  fur- 
nished intimations  of  Avhat  was  to  occur, 
but  he  had  not  yet  been  permitted  to  un- 
derstand their  signification.  •![  What  shall 
be  in  the  latter  days.  Gr.  n  iaxi^rtjiv  Turn 
tllitpbjf — '  in  the  last  days.'  Vulg.  in  novis- 
eimis  temporibns — 'in  the  last  times.' 
Chald.  «»n-i-«  nnns3_'  in  the  after  days ;' 
or,  as  Faber  expresses  it,  in  the  afterhood 
of  days.  The  phrase  means  what  we 
would  express  by  saying,  hereafter;  in 
future  times;  in  time  to  come.  This 
phrase  often  has  special  reference  to  the 
times  of  the  Messiah,  as  the  last  dispen- 
sation of  things  on  the  earth,  or  as  that 
under  which  the  affairs  of  the  world  will 
DO  wound  up.  Comp.  Notes  on  Isa.  ii.  2. 
It  does  not  appear,  however,  to  be  used 


in  that  sense  here,  but  it  denotes  merely 
future  times.  The  phrase  '  the  latter 
days,'  therefore,  does  not  exactly  convey 
the  sense  of  the  original.  It  is  future 
days  rather  than  latter  days.  ^  Thy 
dream  and  the  visions  of  thy  head  njion 
thy  bed.  The  phrase  '  visions  of  thy 
head,'  means  conceptions  or  notions 
formed  by  the  brain.  It  would  seem  from 
this  that,  even  in  the  time  of  Daniel,  the 
brain  was  regarded  as,  in  some  sense,  tho 
org.an  of  thinking,  or  that  thought  had  its 
seat  in  the  head.  We  are  not  to  suppose 
that  by  the  use  of  these  different  expres- 
sions Daniel  meant  to  describe  two  things, 
or  to  intimate  that  Nebuchadnezzar  had 
had  visions  which  were  distinct.  AVhat 
he  saw  might  be  described  as  a  dream  or 
a  vision.  It,  in  fact,  had  the  nature  of 
both.  ^  Are  these.  '  These  which  I  now 
proceed  to  describe.' 

29.  As  for  thee,  0  king,  thy  thoughts 
came  into  thy  mind  vpon  thy  bed.  Marg. 
tip  ;  that  is,  thy  thoughts  ascended.  The 
Chaldee  is, '  thy  thoughts  ascended' — P/P- 
So  the  Greek  :  '  Thy  thoughts  ascended — 
ai>iffriaav — upon  thy  couch.'  There  is,  evi- 
dently, some  allusion  to  the  thoughts 
ascending,  or  going  vp,  and  perhaps  the 
idea  is  that  they  were  employed  on  im- 
portant subjects  —  an  idea  which  we  now 
express  by  saying  that  one's  thoughts  are 
elevated,  as  contrasted  with  those  which 
are  low  and  grovelling.  ^  What  should 
come  to  jyass  hereafter.  It  would  seem 
most  probable  from  this  that  the  thoughts 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  were  occupied  with 
this  subject  in  his  waking  moments  on  his 
bed,  and  that  the  dream  was  grafted  on 
this  train  of  thought  when  he  fell  asleep. 
Nothing  is  more  probable  than  that  his 
thoughts  might  be  thus  occupied.  The 
question  respecting  his  successor;  the 
changes  which  might  occur;  the  possi- 
bility of  revolutions  in  other  kingdoms, 
or  in  the  provinces  of  his  own  vast  en*" 
pire,  all  were  topics  on  which  his  mind 
would  probably  bo  employed.  As  God 
designed,  too,  to  fix  his  thoughts  par- 
ticularly  on   that  general   subject  —  the 


B.  C.  603.] 


CHAPTER  II. 


IK 


30  But  as  for  me,  this  secret  is 

not  revealed  to  me  for  any  wisdom 

that  I  have  more  thau  any  living, 

but  for  ^  their  sakes  that  shall  make 


Acts  3. 12. 


changes  which  were  to  occur  in  his  em- 
pire—  such  an  occasion,  when  his  atten- 
tion was  greatly  engrossed  with  the 
subject,  would  be  very  suitable  to  impart 
the  knowledge  which  he  did  by  this 
rision.  Daniel  refers  to  this,  probably, 
because  it  would  do  much  to  confirm  the 
monarch  in  the  belief  of  his  inspiration  if 
he  referred  to  the  train  of  thought  which 
had  preceded  the  dream;  as  it  is  n^t  im- 
probable that  the  king  would  remember 
his  vyaki)}tj  thoughts  on  the  subject, 
though  his  dream  was  forgotten. 

30.  But  a-s  for  me.  So  far  as  I  am  con- 
cerned in  this  matter,  or  whatever  skill 
or  wisdom  I  may  evince  in  the  interpre- 
tation, it  \3  not  to  be  traced  to  myself. 
The  previous  verse  commences  with  the 
expression  '  as  for  thee,'  and  in  this  verse 
by  the  phrase  '  as  for  me,'  Daniel  puts 
himself  in  strong  contrast  with  the  king. 
The  way  in  which  this  was  done  was  nut 
such  as  to  flatter  the  vanity  of  the  king, 
and  cannot  be  regarded  as  the  art  of  the 
courtier,  and  yet  it  was  such  as  would  be 
universally  adopted  to  conciliate  his  fa- 
vour, and  to  give  him  an  elevated  idea  of 
the  modesty  and  piety  of  the  youthful 
Daniel.  In  the  previous  verse  he  says, 
that,  as  to  what  pertained  to  the  king, 
God  had  greatly  honoured  him  by  giving 
him  important  intimations  of  what  was 
yet  to  occur.  Occupying  the  position 
which  he  did,  it  might  be  supposed  that  it 
would  not  be  wholly  unnatural  that  he 
should  be  thus  favoured,  and  Daniel  does 
not  say,  as  in  his  own  case,  that  it  was 
not  on  account  of  anything  in  the  cha- 
racter and  rank  of  the  king  that  this  had 
been  communicated  to  him.  But  when 
he  comes  to  speak  of  himself — a  youth ;  a 
captive  ;  a  stranger  in  Babylon  ;  a  native 
of  another  land,  nothing  was  more  natu- 
ral or  proper  than  that  he  should  state 
distinctly  that  it  was  not  on  account  of 
anything  in  him  that  this  was  done. 
^  This  secret  is  not  revealed  to  me  for  any 
wisdom  that  I  have  more  than  ant/  living. 
That  is,  '  it  is  not  l>/  any  wisdom  which  I 
have  above  others,  nor  is  it  on  account  of 
tny  previous  wisdom  which  I  have  pos- 
lessed  or  manifested.'     There  is  an  rbso- 


known  the  interpretat.  on  to  tho 
king,  and  that  thou  mightest  know 
the  thoughts  of  thy  heart. 

b  Or,  the  intent  that  the  intrrpretation  may  bt 
made  known. 

lute  and  total  disclaimer  of  the  idea  that  it 
was  in  any  sense,  or  in  any  way,  on  account 
of  his  own  superiority  in  wisdom.  All  the 
knowledge  which  he  had  in  the  case  was  to 
be  traced  entirely  to  God.  ^  But  for  their 
takes  that  shall  make  known  the  interpreta- 
tion to  the  kinrj.  Marg.,  '  or,  the  intent  that 
the  interjJretation  may  he  made  known.' 
The  margin  is  the  more  correct  rendering, 
and  should  have  been  admitted  into  the 
text.  Tho  literal  translation  is,  'butdn'r) 
on  account  of  the  thing  that  they  might 
make  known  the  interpretation  to  the 
king.'  The  word  rendered  'make  known' 
is  indeed  in  the  plural,  but  it  is  evidently 
used  in  an  impersonal  sense,  meaning  that 
the  interpretation  would  be  made  known. 
'  It  was  to  the  intent  that  they  might 
make  it  known ;'  that  is,  that  somebody 
might  do  it,  or  that  it  might  be  done. 
Would  not  modesty  and  delicacy  lead  to 
the  choice  of  such  an  expression  here, 
inclining  Daniel  to  avoid,  as  far  as  pos- 
sible, all  mention  of  himself?  The  main 
thought  is,  that  the  grand  object  to  be 
secured  was  not  to  glorify  Daniel,  or  any 
other  human  being,  but  to  communicate 
to  this  heathen  monarch  important  truths 
respecting  coming  events,  and  through 
him  to  the  world.  ^  And  that  thou  might- 
est know  the  thour/lits  of  thy  heart.  In 
reference  to  this  matter.  That  is,  that  he 
might  be  able  to  recall  the  thoughts  which 
passed  through  his  mind  in  the  dream. 
This  (vs.  27-30)  is  the  introduction  to 
the  important  disclosure  which  Daniel 
was  about  to  make  to  the  king.  This 
entire  disclaimer  of  the  honour  of  liaving 
originated  the  interpretation  by  his  own 
wisdom,  and  ascribing  it  to  God,  is  worthy 
here  of  special  attention.  It  is  probable 
that  the  magicians  were  accustomed  to 
ascribe  to  their  own  skill  and  sagacity  the 
ability  to  interpret  dreams  and  the  other 
prognostics  of  the  future,  and  to  claim 
special  honour  on  that  account.  In  oppo- 
sition to  this,  Daniel  utterly  disclaims  any 
such  wisdom  himself,  and  attributes  tho 
skill  which  he  has  entirely  to  God.  Thi3 
is  a  beautiful  illustration  of  the  nature  of 
modesty  and  piety.     It  places  before  us  a 


132 


DANIEL. 


IB  C.  603. 


3i  ^  Thou,  0  liing,  i  Kawest,  and  I  image,  whose  brightness  ivaj  cxce' 
)ehold  a  great  image.     This  great  =■  Wast  seeing. 


voung  man,  having  now  the  prospect  of 
being  elevated  to  great  honours ;  under 
every  temptation  to  arrogate  the  pos- 
session of  extraordinary  wisdom  to  him- 
self; suddenly  exalted  above  all  the  sages 
of  the  most  splendid  court  on  earth,  dis- 
claiming all  merit,  and  declaring,  in  the 
most  solemn  manner,  that  whatever  pro- 
found wisdom  there  might  be  in  the  com- 
munication which  he  was  about  to  make, 
it  was  not  in  the  slightest  degree  to  be 
traced  to  himself.  See  the  remarks  at  the 
end  of  the  chapter  (6.) 

31.  Thou,  0  kint/,  sawest.  Marg.  icast 
teeing.  The  margin  is  in  accordance  with 
the  Chaldee.  The  language  is  properly 
that  which  denotes  a  prolonged  or  atten- 
tive observation.  lie  was  in  an  attitude 
favourable  to  vision,  or  wa^  looking  with 
intensity,  and  there  appeared  before 
him  this  remarkable  image.  Comp.  ch. 
vii.  1,  2,  4,  6.  It  was  not  a  thing  which 
appeared  for  a  moment,  and  then  van- 
ished, but  which  remained  so  long  that 
he  could  contemplate  it  with  accuracy. 
^  And,  behold,  a  great  image.  Chald. 
oni  {mage  that  was  grand — >to|;'  ^^  DTi. 
So  the  Vulgate — statua  una  grandis.  So 
the  Greek — cUCov  /iia.  The  object  seems 
to  be  to  fix  the  attention  on  the  fact  that 
there  was  but  one  image,  though  composed 
of  so  different  materials,  and  of  materials 
that  seemed  to  be  so  little  fitted  to  be 
worked  together  into  the  same  statue. 
The  idea,  by  its  being  represented  as  one, 
is,  tha.t  it  wan,  in  some  respects,  the  same 
kingdom  that  he  saw  symbolized  :  that  is, 
that  it  would  extend  over  the  same  coun- 
tries, and  could  be,  in  some  sense,  re- 
garded as  a  prolongation  of  the  same 
empire.  There  was  so  much  of  identity, 
though  different  in  many  respects,  that  it 
could  be  represented  as  one.  The  word 
rendered  image — 2 -i' — denotes  properly  a 
thade,  or  shadotc,  and  then  anything  that 
shadows  forth,  or  that  represents  any- 
thing. It  is  applied  to  man  (Gen.  i.  27), 
as  shadowing  forth,  or  representing  God  ; 
that  is,  there  was  something  in  man  when 
he  was  created,  which  had  so  far  a  re- 
gemblance  to  God  that  he  might  be  re- 
garded as  an  image  of  him.  The  word  is 
often  used  to  denote  idols — as  supposed  to 
be  a  representation  of  the  gods,  either  in 
\heir  forms,  or  as  shadowing  forth  their 


character,  as  majestic,  stern,  mild,  severe^ 
merciful,  &c.  Num.  xxxiii.  52 ;  1  Sam. 
vi.  5;  2  Kings  xi.  IS;  2  Chron.  xxiii.  17, 
Ezek.  vii.  20,  xvi.  17,  xxiii.  14;  Amos  v. 
26.  This  image  is  not  represented  as  an 
idol  to  be  worshipped,  nor  in  the  use  of 
the  word  is  it  to  be  supposed  that  there  ia 
an  allusion,  as  Prof.  Bush  supposes,  to 
the  fact  that  these  kingdoms  would  be 
idolatrous,  but  the  word  is  used  in  its 
proper  and  primitive  sense,  to  denote 
something  which  would  rejyresent,  or 
shadow  forth  the  kingdoms  which  would 
exist.  The  exact  size  of  the  image  ia 
not  mentioned.  It  is  only  suggested  that 
it  was  great  —  a  proper  characteristic  to 
represent  the  greatness  of  the  kingdoma 
to  which  it  referred.  *[  This  great  image. 
The  word  here  rendered  great — 2D  is  dif- 
ferent from  that  used  in  the  previous 
clause,  though  it  is  not  easy  to  determino 
the  exact  difference  between  the  words. 
Both  denote  that  the  image  was  of 
gigantic  dimensions.  It  is  well  remarked 
by  Prof.  Bush,  that  "  the  monuments  of 
antiquity  suflBciently  evince  that  the 
humour  prevailed  throughout  the  East, 
and  still  more  in  Egypt,  of  constructing 
enormous  statues,  which  were  usually 
dedicated  to  some  of  their  deities,  and 
connected  with  their  worship.  The  ob- 
ject, therefore,  now  presented  in  the 
monarch's  dream,  was  not,  probably,  en- 
tirely new  to  his  thoughts."  ^  Whose 
brightness  icas  excellent.  '  Whose  bright- 
ness excelled,  or  was  unusual  and  re- 
markable.' The  word  rendered  brightness 
— IV — is  found  only  in  Daniel.  It  is  ren- 
dered brightness  in  ch.  ii.  31,  iv.  36,  and 
in  the  margin  in  ch.  v.  6,  and  counter 
nance  in  ch.  v,  6  (text),  and  in  vs.  9,  10 
ch.  vii.  28.  From  the  places  where  it  ia 
found,  particularly  ch.  iv.  36,  it  is  clear 
that  it  is  used  to  denote  a  certain  beauiy, 
or  majesty,  shining  forth  in  the  counte- 
nance, which  was  fitted  to  impress  the 
beholder  with  .awe.  The  term  here  is  to 
be  understood  not  merel.y  of  the  face  of 
the  image,  but  of  its  entire  aspect,  as 
having  something  in  it  signally  splendid 
and  imposing.  We  have  only  to  conceive 
of  a  colossal  statue  whose  head  was  bur- 
nished gold,  and  a  large  part  of  whose 
frame  was  polished  silver,  to  see  the 
force  of  this  language.      ^  Stood  befori 


B.O.  603.] 


CHAPTER  II. 


las 


lent,  stood  before  theo  :  and  the  form 
thereof  icas  terrible. 

C2  This  imago's  head  was  of  fine 


thee.  It  stood  over  against  him  in  full 
view.  He  had  an  opportunity  of  sur- 
yeying  it  clearly  and  distinctly.  ^  And 
the  form  thereof  was  terrible.  Vast,  im- 
posing, grand,  fearful.  The  sudden  ap- 
pearance of  such  an  object  as  this  could 
not  but  fill  the  mind  with  terror.  The 
design  for  which  this  representation  was 
made  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  clearly  un- 
folded in  the  explanation  which  Daniel 
gives.  It  may  be  remarked  here,  in 
general,  that  such  an  appearance  of  a 
gigantic  image  was  well  adapted  to  re- 
present successive  kingdoms,  and  that  the 
representation  was  in  accordance  with  the 
spirit  of  ancient  times.  "  In  ancient  coins 
and  medals,"  says  the  editor  of  the  Pic- 
torial Bible,  "  nothing  is  more  common 
than  to  see  cities  and  nations  represented 
by  human  figures,  male  and  female.  Ac- 
cording to  the  ideas  which  suggested 
Buch  symbols,  a  vast  image  in  the  human 
figure  was,  therefore,  a  very  fit  emblem 
of  sovereign  power  and  dominion,  while 
the  materials  of  which  it  was  composed 
did  most  significantly  typify  the  character 
of  the  various  empires,  the  succession  of 
which  was  foreshown  by  this  vision. 
This  last  idea,  of  expressing  the  condition 
of  things  by  metallic  symbols,  was  pre- 
valent before  the  time  of  Daniel.  Hesiod, 
who  lived  about  two  centuries  before 
Daniel,  characterises  the  succession  of 
ages  (four)  by  the  very  same  metals — gold, 
silver,  brass,  and  iron." 

32.  This  image's  head  was  of  fine  ijold. 
Chald.  good  gold — 3?  ^n"^ — that  is,  fine, 
pure,  unalloyed.  The  whole  head  of  the 
figure,  colossal  as  it  was,  appeared  to  be 
composed  wholly  of  this.  Had  the  ichole 
image  been  made  of  gold,  it  would  not 
have  been  so  striking — for  it  was  not  un- 
common to  construct  vast  statues  of  this 
metal.  Comp.  ch.  iii.  1.  But  the  remark- 
able peculiarity  of  this  image  was,  that  it 
was  composed  of  different  materials,  some 
of  which  were  seldom  or  never  used  in 
such  a  structure,  and  all  of  which  had  a 
peculiar  significancy.  On  the  significancy 
of  this  part  of  the  figure,  and  the  resem- 
blance between  this  head  of  gdd  and 
Nebuchadnezzar  himself,  see  Notes  on  vs. 
37,  38.  %  Ilia  breast  avd  his  aiina  of 
silvor.  The  word  rendered  breaat — riH — 
12 


gold,  his  breajt  and  his  arms  of  sil- 
ver, his  belly  and  his  ^thighs  of  brass, 
»  Or,  sides. 

is  in  the  plural  number,  in  accordance 
with  a  common  usage  in  the  Hebrew,  by 
which  several  members  of  the  human 
body  are  often  expressed  in  the  plural — as 
QMS — faces,  &c.  There  is  a  foundation 
for  such  a  usage  in  nature,  in  the  two- 
fold form  of  many  of  the  portions  of  the 
human  body.  The  portion  of  the  body 
which  is  here  represented  is  obviously  tho 
upper  portion  of  the  front  part — that  which 
is  prominentlj'  visible  when  we  look  at 
the  human  frame.  Next  to  the  head  it  ia 
the  most  important  part,  as  it  em- 
braces most  of  the  vital  organs.  Soma 
degree  of  inferiority,  as  well  as  the  idea 
of  succession,  would  be  naturally  re- 
presented by  this.  "  The  inferior  value 
of  silver  as  compared  with  gold,  will 
nnturally  suggest  some  degree  of  de- 
cline or  degeneracy  in  the  character  of 
the  subject  represented  by  the  metal ;  and 
so  in  other  members,  as  we  proceed  down- 
ward, as  the  material  becomes  contin- 
ually baser,  we  naturally  infer  that  the 
subject  deteriorates,  in  some  sense,  in  the 
like  manner."  Prof.  Bush,  in  loc.  On 
the  kingdom  represented  by  this,  and  the 
propriety  of  this  representation,  see  Notes 
on  ver.  39.  %  His  belly  and  his  thighs  of 
brass.  Marg.  sides.  It  is  not  necessary 
to  enter  minutely  into  an  examination  of 
the  words  here  used.  The  word  belly 
denotes,  unquestionably,  the  regions  of  the 
abdomen  as  externally  visible.  The  word 
rendered  thighs  in  the  text,  is  rendered 
sides  in  the  margin.  It  is,  like  the  word 
breast  in  tho  previous  verse,  in  the  plural 
number,  and  for  the  same  reason.  The 
Hebrew  word  —  T^^  —  is  commonly  ren- 
dered thigh  in  the  Scriptures  (Gen.  xxiv, 
2,  9,  xxxii.  25,  31,  32,  et  al.),  though  it  is 
also  frequently  rendered  side,  Ex.  xxxii. 
27,  xL  22,  24;  Lev.  i.  4;  Num.  iii.  29,  et 
al.  According  to  Gesenius,  it  denotes 
"  the  thick  and  double  fleshy  member 
which  commences  at  the  bottom  of  the 
spine,  and  extends  to  the  lower  legs."  li 
is  that  part  on  which  the  sword  was 
formerly  worn.  Ex.  xxxii.  27,  Judg.  iii. 
16,  21;  Ps.  xlv.  4.  It  is  also  that  part 
which  was  smitten,  as  an  expression  of 
mourning,  or  of  indignation.  Jer.  xxxi. 
19  ;  Ezek.  xxi.  17.  Comp.  Horn.  II.  xii. 
162,  XV.  397  ;  Od.  xiu.  198;  Cic.  cl.  Drat. 


134 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  603. 


33  His  legs  of  iron,  his  feot  part 
of  iron  and  part  of  clay. 

'■  Or.  which  was  not  in  hands. 

80;  Quinc.  xi.  3.  It  is  uot  improperly 
here  rendered  thighs,  and  the  portion  of  the 
figure  that  was  of  brass  was  that  between 
the  breast  and  the  lower  legs,  or  extended 
from  the  breast  to  the  knees.  The  word 
is  elsewhere  employed  to  denote  the  shaft 
or  main  trunk  of  the  gv,lden  candlestick 
of  the  tabernacle.  Ex.  xxr.  31,  xxxvi. 
17,  Num.  viii.  4.  ^  0/  brass.  An  infe- 
rior metal,  and  denoting  a  kingdom  of 
inferior  power  or  excellence.  On  the 
kingdom  represented  by  this,  see  Notes 
on  vcr.  .39. 

.33.  His  legs  of  iron.  The  portion  of 
the  lower  limbs,  from  the  knees  to  the 
ancles.  This  is  undoubtedly  the  usual 
meaning  of  the  English  word  legs,  and  it 
as  clearly  appears  to  be  the  sense  of  the 
original  word  here.  Iron  was  regarded 
as  inferior  to  either  of  the  other  metals 
specified,  and  yet  was  well  adapted  to 
denote  a  kingdom  of  a  particular  kind — 
less  noble  in  some  respects,  and  yet  hardy, 
powerful,  and  adapted  to  tread  down  the 
world  by  conquest.  On  the  application 
of  this,  see  Notes  on  ver.  40.  1[  His  feet 
part  of  iron  and  part  of  clai/.  As  to  his 
feet;  or  in  respect  to  his  feet,  they  were 
partly  of  iron,  and  partly  of  clay — a  mix- 
ture denoting  great  strength,  united  with 
that  which  is  fragile  and  weak.  The 
word  rendered  clay  in  this  place — ']0n — is 
found  nowhere  else  except  in  this  chapter, 
and  is  always  rendered  clay.  Ch.  ii.  33, 
34,  35,  41  (twice),  42,  43  (twice),  45.  In 
some  instances  (vs.  41,  43)  the  epithet 
miry  is  applied  to  it.  This  would  seem  to 
imply  that  it  was  not  'burnt  or  baked 
clay,'  or  '  earthenware,'  as  Prof.  Bush 
Bupposes,  but  clay  in  its  natural  state. 
The  idea  would  seem  to  be,  that  the 
framework,  so  to  speak,  was  iron,  with 
clay  worked  in,  or  filling  up  the  inter- 
etices,  so  as  to  furnish  an  image  of 
strength  combined  with  that  which  is 
weak.  That  it  would  be  well  adapted 
to  represent  a  kingdom  that  had  many 
elements  of  permanency  in  it,  yet  that 
Wets  combined  with  things  that  made  it 
weak — a  mixture  of  that  which  was  pow- 
erful with  that  which  was  liable  to  be 
crushed ;  capable  of  putting  forth  great 
efforts,  and  of  sustaining  great  shocks, 
»nd  jet  having  such  elements  of  feeble- 


34  Thou  sawest  till  that  a  stone 
was  cut  out  ^-without  *>  hands,  ■which 

b  Zee.  4.  6;  John  1.  13. 


ness  and  decay  as  to  make  it  liable  to  be 
overthrown.  For  the  application  of  this, 
see  Notes  on  vs.  41-43. 

34.  Thou  saicest.  Chald.  '  Thou  wast 
seeing;'  that  is,  thou  didst  continue  to 
behold,  implying  that  the  vision  was  of 
somewhat  long  continuance.  It  did  not 
appear,  and  then  suddenly  vanish,  but  it 
remained  so  long  that  he  had  an  oppor- 
tunity of  careful  observation.  ^  Till 
that  a  stone  ivas  cut  without  hands.  That 
is,  from  a  mountain  or  hill.  ver.  45. 
This  idea  is  expressed  in  the  Latin  and 
the  Greek  version.  The  vision  appears 
to  have  been  that  of  a  colossal  image 
standing  on  a  plain,  in  the  vicinity  of  a 
mountain,  standing  firm,  until,  by  some 
unseen  agency,  and  in  an  unaccountable 
manner,  a  stone  became  detached  from 
the  mountain,  and  was  made  to  impinge 
against  it.  The  margin  here  is,  which 
was  not  in  his  hands.  The  more  correct 
rendering  of  the  Chaldee,  however,  is  that 
in  the  text :  literally,  '  a  stone  was  cut  out 
which  was  not  by  hands' — V.y^  : — or  per- 
haps still  more  accurately,  'a  stone  was 
cut  out  which  was  not  in  hands,'  so  that 
the  fact  that  it  was  not  in  or  by  hand* 
refers  rather  to  its  not  being  projected  by 
hands  than  to  the  manner  of  its  being 
detached  from  the  mountain.  The  essen- 
tial idea  is,  that  the  agency  of  hands  did 
not  appear  at  all  in  the  case.  The  stone 
seemed  to  be  self-moved.  It  became 
detached  from  the  mountain,  and,  as  if 
instinct  with  life,  struck  the  image  and 
demolished  it.  The  word  rendered  stone — 
p^t— determines  nothing  as  to  the  size  of 
the  stone,  but  the  whole  statement  would 
seem  to  imply  that  it  was  not  of  large 
dimensions.  It  struck  upon  the  feet 
of  the  image  (ver.  35),  and  it  became 
itself  a  great  mountain — all  which  would 
seem  to  imply  that  it  was  at  first  not 
large.  AVhat  increased  the  astonishment 
of  the  monarch  was,  that  a  stone  of  such 
dimensions  should  have  been  adequate  to 
overthrow  so  gigantic  a  statue,  and  to 
have  ground  it  to  powder.  The  points  on 
which  it  was  clearly  intended  to  fix  the 
attention  of  the  monarch,  and  which 
made  the  vision  so  significant  and  remark- 
3,ble  were  these :  (a)  the  colossal  size  and 
firmness  of  the  image ;  (6)  the  fact  that  a 


B.  C.  603.] 


CHAPTER    II. 


135 


smote  the  image  upon  his  feet  that 
were  of  iron  and  clay,  and  brake 
them  to  pieces. 

35  Then  was  the  iron,  the  clay. 


Btone,  not  of  large  size,  should  be  seen  to 
be  self-detached  iVom  the  mountain,  and 
to  move  against  the  image ;  (c)  the  fact 
that  it  should  completely  demolish  and 
pulverise  the  colossal  figure ;  and  {d)  the 
fact  that  then  this  stone  of  inconsiderable 
size  should  be  itself  mysteriously  augment- 
ed until  it  filled  the  world.  It  should  be 
added,  that  the  vision  appears  not  to  have 
been  that  of  a  stone  detached  from  the  side 
of  a  hill,  and  rolling  dou-n  the  mountain 
by  the  force  of  gravitation,  but  that  of  a 
stone  detached,  and  then  movinf/  off 
toward  the  image  as  if  it  had  been  thrown 
from  a  hand,  though  the  hand  was  un- 
seen. This  would  very  strikingly  and 
appropriately  express  the  idea  of  some- 
thing apparently  small  in  its  origin,  that 
was  impelled  b^'  a  cause  that  was  unseen, 
and  that  bore  with  mighty  force  upon 
an  object  of  colossal  magnitude,  by  an 
agency  that  could  not  be  explained  by 
the  causes  that  usually  operate.  For  the 
application  and  pertinency  of  this,  see 
Notes  on  vs.  44,  45.  %  Which  smote  the 
image  upon  hia  feet.  The  word  here  used — 
NOP — means  to  strike,  to  smite;  without 
reference  to  the  question  whether  it  is  a 
single  blow,  or  whether  the  blow  is  often 
repeated.  The  Hebrew  word — xnp — is 
uniformly  used  as  referring  to  the  clapping 
of  the  hands;  that  is,  smiting  them  to- 
gether. Ps.  xcviii.  8  ;  Isa.  Iv.  12  ;  Ezek. 
XXV.  6.  The  Chaldee  word  ia  used  only 
here  and  in  ver.  35,  referring  to  the 
smiting  of  the  image,  and  in  ch.  iv.  35, 
where  it  is  rendered  'stay' — 'none  can 
stay  his  hand.'  The  connection  here,  and 
the  whole  statement,  would  seem  to 
demand  the  sense  of  a  continued  or  pro- 
longed smiting,  or  of  repeated  blows, 
rather  than  a  single  concussion.  The 
great  image  was  not  only  thrown  down, 
but  there  was  a  subsequent  process  of 
comminntion  independent  of  what  would 
have  been  produced  by  the  faW.  A  fall 
would  only  have  broken  it  into  large 
blocks  or  fragments ;  but  this  continued 
Bmiting  reduced  it  to  powder.  Thi?  would 
imply,  therefore,  not  a  single  shock,  or 
violent  blow,  but  some  cause  continuing 
to   operate   until    that  which   had   been 


the  brass,  the  silver,  and  the  gold, 
broken  to  pieces  together,  and  be- 
came like  >  the  chaff  of  the  summer 
threshing-floors  ;  and  the  wind  car- 
^  Ps.  1.  4;  lies.  13.  3. 


overthrown  was  effectually  destroyed,  like 
a  vast  image  reduced  to  impalpable  pow- 
der. The  frst  concussion  on  the  feet 
made  it  certain  that  the  colossal  frame 
would  fall;  but  there  was  a  longer  pro- 
cess necessary  before  the  whole  effect 
should  bo  accomplished.  Comp.  Notes  on 
vs.  44,  45.  ^  And  brake  them  to  jncces. 
In  ver.  35,  the  idea  is,  "  they  became  like 
the  chaff  of  the  summer  threshing-floors." 
The  meaning  is  not  that  the  image  was 
broken  to  fragments,  but  that  it  waa 
beaten  fine — reduced  to  powder — so  that 
it  might  be  scattered  by  the  wind.     This 

is  the  sense  of  the  Chaldee  word — p?J] — 
and  of  the  Hebrew  word  also — PP").  See 
Ex.  xxxii.  20:  "And  he  took  the  calf 
which  they  had  made,  and  burned  it  in 
the  fire,  and  ground  it  to  powder."  Deut. 
ix.  21:  "And  I  took  your  sin,  the  calf 
which  ye  had  made,  and  burnt  it  with  fire, 
and  stamped  it,  and  ground  it  very  small, 
even  until  it  was  as  small  as  dust."  Isa. 
xli.  15 :  "  Thou  shalt  thresh  the  mountains, 
and  beat  them  small,  and  shalt  make 
the  hills  as  chaff."  2  Kings  xxiii.  15  :  "He 
burnt  the  high  places,  and  stamped  it  small 
to  powder."  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  4 :  "  And  they 
brake  down  the  altars,  &c.,  and  made 
dust  of  them,  and  strewed  them  upon  the 
graves  of  them  that  had  sacrificed  unto 
them."  Comp.  Ex.  xxx.  36 ;  2  Chron. 
xxxiv.  7 ;  2  Kings  xxiii.  6.  From  these 
passages  it  is  clear  that  the  general  mean- 
ing of  the  word  is  that  of  reducing  any- 
thing to  fine  dust  or  powder,  so  that  it 
may  be  easily  blown  about  by  the  wind. 

35.  Then  was  the  iron,  the  clay,  the 
brass,  the  silver,  and  the  gold  broken  ir, 
2>ieces  together,  and  became  like  the  chaff 
of  the  summer  threshing-floor.  The  word 
rendered  together — n^rip — our  translators 
would  seem  to  have  understood  as  refer- 
ring to  time ;  to  its  being  done  simul- 
taneously. The  more  literal  interpreta- 
tion, however,  is  'as  one;'  that  is,  'they 
were  beaten  small  as  one,'  referring  to 
identity  of  condition.  They  were  all  re- 
duced to  one  indiscriminate  mass  ;  to  sucb 
a  mass  that  the  original  materials  couli 
no  longer  be  distinguished,  and  would  all 


136 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  603 


ried  them  a-n-ay,  that  >  no  place  was  I      36  This  is  the   dream  ;   and  we 
found  for  them :  and  the  stone  that    -will  tell  the  interpretation  thereof 


Bmote  the  image  Ijccame  a  great 
">  mountain,  and  filled  "=  the  whole 
earth. 

»Ps.  37.  S6.         bis.  2.  2,  3.         <=  1  Cor.  15.  25. 


be  blown  away  together.  The  literal 
meaning  of  the  word  used — in — and  n7n 
— is  one,  OT  first.  Ezra  iv.  S,  "wrote  «' 
letter;"  v.  l."".,  '■  in  thc/;-6'0'earof  Cyrus  ;" 
ri.  2,  "a  roll;"  Dan.  ii.  9,  "there  is  but 
one  decree  for  you;"  iii.  19,  "heat  the 
furnace  one  seven  times  hotter,"  &c. 
United  with  the  conjunction  (d)  it  means 
as  one,  like  the  Heb.  1^3.  Eccl.  xi.  6; 
2  Chron.  v.  1.3 ;  Ezra  ii.  6,  iii.  9 ;  Isa.  Ixv. 
25.  The  phrase  "  cliaff  of  the  summer 
threshing-floors,"  refers  to  the  mode  of 
winnowing  grain  in  the  East.  This  was 
done  in  the  open  air,  usually  on  an  ele- 
vated place,  by  throwing  the  gi-ain  when 
threshed  into  the  air  with  a  shovel,  and 
the  wind  thus  drove  away  the  chafi".  Such 
chaff,  therefore,  naturally  became  an  em- 
blem of  anything  that  was  light,  and  that 
would  be  easily  dissipated.  See  Notes 
on  Isa.  XXX.  24.  Matt.  iii.  12.  f[  And  the 
wind  carried  them  awa>/,  that  no  place  was 
found/or  them.  They  were  entirely  dis- 
sipated, like  chaff.  As  that  seems  to 
have  no  longer  any  place,  but  is  carried 
we  know  not  where,  so  the  figure  here 
•would  denote  an  entire  annihilation  of 
the  power  to  which  it  refers.  ^  And  the 
itone  that  smote  the  image  became  a  great 
mountain,  and  filled  the  ichole  earth.  The 
vision  which  was  before  the  mind  of  the 
king  as  here  represented  was,  that  the 
Btone  which  was  cut  out  of  the  mountain 
was  at  first  small,  and  that  while  he  con- 
templated it,  it  swelled  to  larger  dimen- 
sions, until  it  became  an  immense  moun- 
tain —  a  mountain  that  filled  the  whole 
land.  It  was  this  which,  perhaps,  more 
than  anything  else,  excited  his  wonder, 
that  a  stone,  at  first  of  so  small  dimen- 
eions,  should  of  itself  so  increase  as  to 
surpass  the  size  of  the  mountain  from 
which  it  was  cut,  until  it  occupied  every 
place  in  view.  Everything  about  it  was 
80  remarkable  and  unusual  that  it  was  no 
wonder  that  he  could  not  explain  it.  We 
have  now  gone  over  a  description  of  the 
literal  vision  as  it  appeared  to  the  mind 
of  the  monarch.  Had  it  been  left  here,  it 
te  clear  that  it  would  have  been  of  diffi- 


before  the  kinj 

37  Thou,  0  king,  art  a  king  ^  of 
kings :   for  e  the  God  of  heaven  hath 

d  Ezr.  7. 12 ;  Is.  ■17.  5 :  Bze.  26.  7  ;  Uos.  8.  10. 
^  Ezr.  1. 2. 


cult  interpretation,  and  possibly  the  true 
explanation  might  never  have  been  sug- 
gested. AVe  have,  however,  an  exposition 
by  Daniel,  which  leaves  no  doubt  as  to 
its  design,  and  which  was  intended  to 
carry  the  mind  forward  into  some  of  the 
most  important  and  remarkable  events  of 
history.  A  portion  of  his  statement  has 
been  fulfilled ;  a  part  remains  still  unac- 
complished, and  a  careful  exposition  of 
his  account  of  the  meaning  of  the  vision 
will  lead  our  thoughts  to  some  of  the 
most  important  historical  events  which 
have  occurred  in  introducing  the  Chris- 
tian dispensation,  and  to  events  still  more 
important  in  the  statement  of  what  is  yet 
to  come. 

31).  This  is  tlie  dream  ;  and  ice  will  tell 
the  interpretation  thereof  be/ore  the  Icing. 
Daniel  here  speaks  in  his  own  name,  and 
in  the  name  of  his  companions.  Hence 
he  says  '  ae  will  tell  the  interpretation.' 
It  was  in  answer  to  their  united  supplica- 
tions (ver.  IS),  that  this  meaning  of  the 
vision  had  been  made  known  to  him,  and 
it  would  not  only  have  been  a  violation 
of  the  i-ules  of  modesty,  but  an  unjust 
assumption,  if  Daniel  had  claimed  the 
whole  credit  of  the  revelation  to  himself. 
Though  he  was  the  only  one  who  ad- 
dressed the  king,  j'et  he  seems  to  have 
desired  that  it  might  be  understood 
that  he  was  not  alone  in  the  honour 
which  God  had  conferred,  and  that  ho 
wished  that  his  companions  should  be  had 
in  just  remembrance.     Comp.  ver.  49. 

37.  Thou,  0  king,  art  «  king  of  kings. 
The  phrase  '  king  of  kings'  is  a  Hebraism, 
to  denote  a  supreme  monarch,  or  one  whc 
has  other  kings  under  him  as  tributary. 
Ezravii.  12;  Ezek.  xxvi.  7.  As  such  it 
is  applied  by  way  of  eminence  to  the  Son 
of  God  in  Rev.  ,xvii.  14,  xix.  16.  As  hero 
used,  it  means  that  Nebuchadnezzar  ruled 
over  tributary  kings  and  princes,  or  that 
he  was  the  most  eminent  of  the  kings  of 
the  earth.  The  sceptre  which  he  swayed 
was,  in  fact,  extended  over  many  nation; 
that  were  once  independent  kingdoms, 
and  the  title  here  conferred  on  him  wa* 


B.  C.  603.] 


CHAPTER   11. 


137 


given  thee  a  kingdom,  power,  and 
strength,  and  glory. 

38  And  wheresoever  the  children 
of  men  dwell,  the  beasts  of  the  field 


not  one  that  was  designed  to  flatter  the 
monarch,  but  was  a  simple  statement  of 
what  was  an  undoubted  truth.  Daniel 
would  not  withhold  any  title  that  was  in 
accordance  with  reality,  as  he  did  not 
withhold  any  communication  in  accord- 
ance with  reality  that  was  adapted  to 
humble  the  monarch.  IT  For  the  God  of 
heaven  hath  ffiven  thee  a  kingdom,  &c.  At 
the  same  time  that  Daniel  gave  him  a 
title  which  might  in  itself  have  ministered 
to  the  pride  of  the  monarch,  he  is  careful 
to  remind  him  that  he  held  this  title  in 
virtue  of  no  wisdom  or  power  of  his  own. 
It  was  the  true  God  who  had  conferred  on 
him  the  sovereignty  of  these  extensive 
realms,  and  it  was  one  of  the  designs  of 
this  vision  to  show  him  that  he  held  his 
power  at  his  will,  and  that  at  his  pleasure 
he  could  cause  it  to  pass  away.  It  was 
the  forgetfulness  of  this,  and  the  pride 
resulting  from  that  forgetfulness,  which 
led  to  the  melancholy  calamity  which 
befel  this  haughty  monarch,  as  recorded 
in  ch.  iv. 

38.  And  wheresoever  the  children  of 
men  dwell,  the  beasts  of  the  field,  and  the 
fowls  of  the  heaven,  hath,  he  fjiven  into  thi/ 
hand.  This  is  evidently  general  lan- 
guage, and  is  not  to  be  pressed  literally. 
It  is  designed  to  say  that  he  ruled  over 
the  whole  world ;  that  is,  the  world  as 
then  known.  This  is  common  language 
applied  in  the  Scriptures  to  the  Baby- 
lonian, Persian,  Grecian  and  Roman 
kingdoms.  Thus  in  ver.  39,  the  third  of 
these  kingdom,  the  Grecian,  was  to  "  bear 
rule  over  all  the  earth."  Comp.  ch.  vili.  5  : 
"  And,  as  I  was  considering,  behold,  an 
he-goat  came  from  the  west  on  the  face 
of  the  whole  earth."  So  of  the  Roman 
empire,  in  ch.  vii.  23  :  "The  fourth  beast 
shall  devour  the  whole  earth."  The  de- 
claration that  his  kingdom  embraced  the 
beasts  of  the  field  and  the  fowls  of  the  air, 
is  a  strong  expression,  meaning  that  he 
reigned  over  the  whole  world.  A  some- 
what similar  description  of  the  extent 
of  the  empire  of  the  king  of  Babylon 
occurs  in  Jer.  xxvii.  4—8 :  "  And  com- 
mand them  to  say  unto  their  masters. 
Thus  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,  the  Gcd  of 
12* 


and  the  fowls  of  the  heaven  hath  hfc 
given  1  into  thy  hand,  and  hath 
made  thee  ruler  over  them  all. 
Thou  a7-t  this  head  of  gold. 

a  Jer.  27.  G. 


Israel,  Thus  shall  ye  say  unto  your  mas- 
ters; I  have  made  the  earth,  the  man  and 
the  beast  that  are  upon  the  ground,  by 
my  great  power,  and  by  my  out-stretchei 
arm,  and  have  given  it  unto  whom  it 
seemed  meet  unto  me.  And  now  I  have 
given  all  these  lands  into  the  hands  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  the  king  of  Babylon,  my 
servant ;  and  the  beast  of  the  field  I  have 
given  him  also  to  serve  him.  And  all 
nations  shall  serve  him,  and  his  son,  and 
his  son's  son,  until  the  very  time  of  his 
land  come;  and  then  many  nations  and 
great  kings  shall  serve  themselves  of  him. 
And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that  the  nation 
and  kingdom  which  will  not  serve  the  same 
Nebuchadnezzar,  the  king  of  Babylon, 
and  that  will  not  put  their  neck  under 
the  yoke  of  the  king  of  Babylon,  that 
nation  will  I  punish,  saith  the  Lord, 
with  the  sword,  and  with  the  famine, 
and  with  the  pestilence,  until  I  have 
consumed  them  by  his  hand."  At  the 
time  referred  to  by  Daniel,  the  sceptre 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  extended  over  all 
these  realms,  and  the  world  was,  in 
fact,  placed  substantially  under  one  head. 
"  All  the  ancient  Eastern  histories,"  says 
Bishop  Newton,  "  almost  are  lost;  but 
there  are  some  fragments  even  of  heathen 
historians  yet  preserved,  which  speak  of 
this  mighty  conqueror  and  his  extended 
empire.  Berosus,  in  Josephus  (Contra 
Apion,  1.  i.  ^  19),  says  that  he  held  in  sub- 
jection Egypt,  Syria,  Phenicia,  Arabia, 
and  by  his  exploits  surpassed  all  the  Chal- 
deans and  Babylonians  who  reigned  before 
him.  Strabo  asserts  that  this  king  among 
the  Chaldeans  was  more  celebrated  than 
Hercules ;  that  he  proceeded  as  far  as  to 
the  pillars  of  Hercules,  and  led  hi.s  army 
cut  of  Spain  into  Thrace  and  Pontus. 
But  his  empire,  though  of  great  extent, 
was  yet  of  no  long  duration  ;  for  it  ended 
in  his  grandson  Belshazzar,  not  seventy 
years  after  the  delivery  of  this  prophecy, 
nor  above  twenty-three  years  after  the 
death  of  Nebuchadnezzar."  Newton  on 
the  Prophecies,  pp.  186,  187.  ^  Thou  art 
this  head  of  cjold.  The  head  of  gold  seen 
in  the  image  represents  thee  as  the  sove- 
reign of  a  vast  empire.     Compared  with 


138 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  60a 


the  other  mon&rclis  who  are  to  succeed 
thee,  thou  art  like  gold  compared  with 
silver,  and  brass,  and  iron ;  or,  compared 
with  thy  kingdom,  theirs  shall  be  as 
silver,  brass,  and  iron  compared  with 
gold.  It  was  common,  at  an  early  period, 
to  speak  of  different  ages  of  the  world  as 
resembling  different  metals.  Comp.  Notes 
on  ver.  31.  In  reference  to  the  expres- 
sion before  us,  "  Thou  art  this  head  of 
gold,"  it  should  be  observed,  that  it  is  not 
probably  to  be  confined  to  the  monarch 
himself,  but  is  rather  spoken  of  him  as  the 
head  of  the  empire;  as  representing  the 
state  ;  as  an  impersonation  of  that  dynasty. 
The  meaning  is,  that  the  Bsrbylonian  em- 
pire, as  it  existed  under  him,  in  its  rela- 
tion to  the  kingdoms  which  should  suc- 
ceed, was  like  the  head  of  gold  seen  in 
the  image  as  compared  with  the  inferior 
metals  that  made  up  the  remaining  por- 
tions of  the  image.  Daniel,  as  an  inter- 
preter, did  not  state  in  what  the  resem- 
blance consisted,  nor  in  what  respects  his 
empire  could  be  likened  to  gold  as  com- 
pared with  those  which  should  follow. 
In  the  scanty  details  which  we  now  have 
of  the  life  of  that  monarch,  and  of  the 
events  of  his  reign,  it  may  not  be  possible 
to  see  as  clearly  as  would  be  desirable,  in 
what  that  resemblance  consisted,  or  the 
full  propriety  of  the  appellation  given  to 
him.  So  far  as  may  now  be  seen,  the 
resemblance  appears  to  have  been  in  the 
followiug  things ;  (I.)  In  respect  to  the 
empire  itself  of  which  he  was  the  sove- 
reign, as  standing  at  the  head  of  the 
others  —  the  first  in  the  line.  This  was 
not  indeed  the  first  kingdom,  but  the  de- 
sign here  was  not  to  give  an  account  of 
all  the  empires  on  earth,  but  to  take  the 
world  as  it  was  then,  and  to  trace  the  suc- 
cessive changes  which  would  occur  pre- 
paratory to  the  establishment  of  the 
kingdom  which  should  finally  spread  over 
the  earth.  Viewed  in  reference  to  this 
design,  it  was  undoubtedly  proper  to 
designate  the  empire  of  Babylon  as  the 
head.  It  not  only  stood  before  them  in 
the  order  of  time,  but  in  such  a  relation 
that  the  others  might  be  regarded  as  in 
some  sort  its  successors ;  that  is,  they 
ieould  SHceeed  it  in  sicai/i»(f  a  general 
ar.eptre  over  the  world.  In  this  respect 
they  would  resemble  also  the  Babj'lonian. 
At  the  time  here  referred  to,  the  dominion 
over  whicii  Ivebucliadnezzar  swayed  his 
Bceptre  was  at  the  head  of  the  nations; 
fras  the    central    power   of    the    Pagan 


world;  was  the  only  empire  that  could 
claim  to  be  universal.  For  a  long  period 
the  kingdom  of  Babylon  had  been  de- 
pendent on  that  of  Assyria,  and  while 
Nineveh  was  the  capital  of  the  Assyrian 
empire,  Babylon  was  the  head  of  a  king- 
dom, in  general  subordinate  to  that  cf 
Assyria,  until  Nabopolassar,  the  imme- 
diate predecessor  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  ren- 
dered the  kingdom  of  Babylon  inde- 
pendent of  the  Assyrians,  and  transferred 
the  seat  of  empire  to  Babylon.  This  was 
about  the  year  626  before  the  Christian 
era.  See  Universal  History,  vol.  iii.  pp. 
412-415.  Nebuchadnezzar,  receiving  this 
mighty  kingdom,  had  carried  his  own 
arms  to  distant  lands;  had  conquered 
India,  Tyre,  and  Egypt;  and,  as  would 
appear,  all  Northern  Africa,  as  far  as  the 
pillars  of  Hercules,  and,  with  quite  unim- 
portant exceptions,  all  the  known  world 
was  subject  to  him.  (II.)  The  appel- 
lation '  head  of  gold'  may  have  been  given 
him  on  account  of  the  splendor  of  his  capi- 
tal, and  the  magnificence  of  his  court.  In 
Isa.  xiv.  4,  Babylon  is  called  "  the  golden 
city."  See  Notes  on  that  place.  In  Isa. 
xiii.  19,  it  is  called  "  the  glory  of  king- 
(oms,  the  beauty  of  the  Chaldees'  excel- 
lency." In  Isa.  xlvii.  5,  it  is  called  "  the 
lady  of  kingdoms."  In  Jer.  li.  13,  it  is 
spoken  of  as  "  abundant  in  treasures," 
and  in  ver.  41,  as  "  the  praiso  of  the 
whole  earth."  So  in  profane  writers, 
Babylon  has  similar  appellations.  Thus 
in  JEsch.  Per.  51,  mention  is  made  of 
Ba/?uX(bv  n  KoXvxpvaoi — Babylon  abounding 
in  gold.  The  conquests  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
enabled  him  to  bring  to  his  capital  the 
spoils  of  nations,  and  to  enrich  his  capital 
above  any  other  city  on  the  earth.  Ac- 
cordingly, he  gave  himself  to  the  work  of 
adorning  a  city  that  should  be  worthy  to 
be  the  head  of  universal  empire,  and  suc- 
ceeded in  making  it  so  splendid  as  to  be 
regarded  as  one  of  the  wonders  of  the 
world.  His  great  work  in  adorning  and 
strengthening  his  capital  consisted,  first, 
of  the  building  of  the  immense  walls  of 
the  city;  second,  of  the  tower  of  Belus; 
and  third,  of  the  hanging  gardens.  For 
a  full  description  of  these,  see  Prideaux's 
Connection,  vol.  i.  p.  232.  acq.  (III.)  The 
appellation  may  have  been  given  him  by 
comparison  with  the  kingdoms  which  were 
to  succeed  him.  In  some  respects — in  ex- 
reno  and  power  —  some  one  or  more  of 
them,  as  the  Roman,  might  surpass  his ; 
but  the  appellation  which  was  appropriate 


B.  C.  603.] 


CHAPTER  II. 


lyy 


to  them  was  not  <jold,  but  they  ■would, 
be  best  denoted  by  the  inferior  metals. 
Thus  the  Medo-Persian  kingdom  was  less 
eplendid  than  that  of  Babylon,  and  would 
be  better  represented  by  silver;  the  Mace- 
donian, though  more  distinguished  by  its 
conquests,  was  less  magnificent,  and  would 
be  better  represented  by  brass;  and  the 
Roman,  though  ultimately  still  more  ex- 
tensive in  its  conquests,  and  still  more 
mighty  in  power,  was  less  remarkable  for 
splendor  than  strength,  and  would  be 
better  represented  by  iron.  In  magnifi- 
cence, if  not  in  power,  the  Babylonian 
surpassed  them  all ;  and  hence  the  pro- 
priety of  the  appellation,  '  head  of  gold.' 
(IV.)  It  is  possible  that  in  this  appel- 
lation there  then  may  have  been  some 
reference  to  the  character  of  the  monarch 
himself.  In  Jer.  xxvii.  6,  he  is  spoken 
of  as  the  '  servant  of  God,'  and  it  is  clear 
that  it  was  designed  that  a  splendid  mis- 
sion was  to  be  accomplished  by  him  as 
under  the  divine  control,  and  in  the  pre- 
paration of  the  world  for  the  coming  of 
the  Messiah.  Though  he  was  proud  and 
haughty  as  a  monarch,  yet  his  own  per- 
sonal character  would  compare  favourably 
with  that  of  many  who  succeeded  him  in 
these  advancing  kingdoms.  Though  his 
conquests  were  numerous,  yet  his  career 
as  a  conqueror  was  not  marked  with  cru- 
elty, like  that  of  many  other  warriors. 
He  was  not  a  mere  conqueror.  He  loved 
also  the  arts  of  peace.  He  sought  to  em- 
bellish his  capital,  and  to  make  it  in  out- 
ward magnificence,  and  in  the  talent 
which  he  concentrated  there,  truly  the 
capital  of  the  world.  Even  Jerusalem  he 
did  not  utterly  destroy,  but  having  se- 
cured a  conquest  over  it,  and  removed 
from  it  what  he  desired  to  embellish  his 
own  capital,  he  still  intended  that  it  should 
be  the  subordinate  head  of  an  important 
province  of  his  dominions,  and  placed  on 
the  throne  one  who  was  closely  allied  to  the 
king  who  reigned  then  when  he  took  the 
city.  But  the  appellation  here,  and  the 
reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  are  to  be  con- 
templated chiefly,  like  the  kingdoms  that 
succeeded,  in  their  relation  to  redemption. 
It  is  in  this  aspect  that  the  study  of  his- 
tory becomes  most  interesting  to  a  mind 
that  regardd  all  events  as  embraced  in  the 
eternal  counsels  of  Grod,  and  it  is  undoubt- 
edly wirh  reference  to  this  that  the  his- 
tory of  these  kingdoms  becomes  in  any 
way  introduced  into  the  inspired  writings. 
All  history  may  be  contemplated  under 


two  aspects :  in  its  secular  bearing ;  and 
in  its  relation  to  the  redemptior;  jf  the 
world.  In  the  former  aspect,  it  has  great 
and  important  uses.  As  furnishing  lea- 
sons  to  statesmen ;  as  showing  the  pro- 
gress of  society ;  as  illustrating  the  effects 
of  vice  and  immoralit}',  and  the  evils  of 
anarchy,  ambition,  and  war ;  as  recording 
and  preserving  the  inventions  in  the  arts, 
and  as  showing  what  are  the  best  methods 
of  civil  government,  and  what  conduces 
most  to  the  happiness  of  a  people,  its 
value  cannot  well  bo  over-estimated.  But 
it  is  in  its  relations  to  the  work  of  re- 
deeming man  that  it  acquires  its  chief 
value,  and  hence  the  sacred  volume  is  so 
much  occupied  with  the  histories  of  early 
nations.  The  rise  and  fall  of  every  na- 
tion ;  the  conquests  and  defeats  which 
have  occurred  in  past  times,  may  all  have 
had,  and  perhaps  may  yet  be  seen  to  have 
had,  an  important  connection  with  the 
redemption  of  man — as  being  designed  to 
put  the  world  in  a  proper  position  for  the 
coming  of  the  Prince  of  Peace,  or  in  some 
way  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  final 
triumph  of  the  gospel.  This  view  gives 
a  new  and  important  aspect  to  history. 
It  becomes  an  object  in  which  all  on 
earth  who  love  the  race  and  desire  its  re- 
demption, and  all  in  heaven,  feel  a  deep 
concern.  Every  monarch ;  every  war- 
rior :  every  statesman  ;  every  man  who  by 
his  eloquence,  bravery,  or  virtue,  has  con- 
tributed anything  to  the  progress  of  the 
race,  or  who  has  in  any  way  played  an 
important  part  in  progress  of  the  world's 
affairs,  becomes  a  being  on  whom  we  can 
look  with  intense  emotion ;  and  in  refe- 
rence to  every  man  of  this  character,  it 
would  be  an  interesting  inquiry  what  he 
has  done  that  has  contributed  to  prepare 
the  way  for  the  introduction  of  tho 
Mediatorial  scheme,  or  to  facilitate  its 
progress  through  the  world.  In  reference 
to  this  point,  the  monarch  whose  charac- 
ter is  now  before  us  seems  to  have  been 
raised  up,  under  an  overruling  Provi- 
dence, to  accomplish  the  following  things  : 
(1.)  To  inflict  ju)/"!'sA?«e)!f  on  the  revolted 
people  of  God  for  their  numerous  idol- 
atries. See  the  Book  of  Jeremiah,  ;)assm. 
Hence,  he  led  his  armies  to  the  land  of 
Palestine ;  he  swept  away  the  people,  and 
bore  them  into  captivity ;  he  burnt  the 
temple,  destroyed  the  capital,  and  laid  the 
land  waste.  (2.)  He  was  the  instrum»nt 
in  the  hand  of  God  of  effectually  puri- 
fying the  Jewish  nation  from  the  sin  of 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  COi 


39  And  aftei  thee  shall  arise  an- 1  other   kingdom   inferior  »  to    thee, 

»  c.  5.2S. 


idolatry.  It  was  for  that  sin  eminently 
t> at  they  were  carried  away;  and  never 
ii>  this  world  have  the  ends  of  punish- 
ment been  better  secured  than  in  this 
instance.  The  chastisement  was  effectual. 
The  .Jewish  nation  has  never  since  sunk 
into  idolatry.  If  there  have  been  indi- 
viduals of  that  nation — of  which,  however, 
there  is  no  certain  evidence  —  who  have 
become  idolaters,  yet  as  a  people  they 
have  been  preserved  from  it.  More  than 
two  thousand  five  hundred  years  have 
since  passed  away  ;  they  have  been  wan- 
derers and  exiles  in  all  lands  ;  ihey  have 
been  persecuted,  ridiculed,  and  oppressed 
on  account  of  their  religion ;  they  have 
been  placed  under  every  possible  induce- 
ment to  conform  to  the  religion  around 
them,  and  yet,  as  professed  worshippers 
of  Jehovah,  the  God  of  their  fathers,  they 
have  maintained  their  integrity,  and 
neither  promises  northreatenings,  neither 
hopes  nor  fears,  neither  life  nor  death, 
have  been  sufficient  to  constrain  the  He- 
brew people  to  bow  the  knee  to  an  idol 
god.  (3.)  Another  object  that  seems  to 
have  been  designed  to  be  accomplished  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  in  relation  to  Kedemp- 
tion,  was,  to  gather  the  nations  under  one 
head  preparatory  to  the  coming  of  the 
Messiah.  It  will  be  seen  in  the  remarks 
which  will  be  made  on  the  relation  of  the 
Roman  empire  to  this  work  (Notes  on  vs. 
40-43),  that  there  were  important  reasons 
why  this  should  be  done.  Preparatory  to 
that,  a  succession  of  such  kingdoms  each 
Bwayed  the  sceptre  over  the  whole  world, 
and  when  the  Messiah  came,  the  way 
was  prepared  for  the  easy  and  rapid  pro- 
pagation of  the  new  religion  to  the  re- 
motest parts  of  the  earth. 

39.  And  after  thee.  This  must  mean 
aiihscqiiently  to  the  reign,  but  it  docs  not 
mean  that  the  kingdom  here  referred  to 
would  immediately  succeed  his  own  reign, 
for  that  would  not  be  true.  The  Medo- 
Persian  empire  did  not  come  into  the 
ascendency  until  many  years  after  the 
death  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  This  occurred 
during  the  reign  of  Belshazzar,  a  grand- 
son of  Nebuchadnezzar,  between  whose 
reign  and  that  of  his  grandfather  there 
had  intervened  the  reigns  of  Evil-mero- 
ilach  and  Neriglassar  besides,  as  the  re- 
piaiuder  of  the  prophecy  relating  to 
wic   image   refers  to    li))(/doms,  and   not 


to  individual  znonarchs,  it  ia  clear  thai 
this  also  relates  not  primarily  to  Nebn- 
chadnezzar  as  an  individual,  but  as  the 
head  of  a  kingdom.  The  meaning  is,  that 
a  kingdom  would  succeed  that  over  which 
he  reigned,  so  far  inferior  that  it  might  be 
represented  by  silver  as  compared  with 
gold.  ^  Shall  arise  another  kingdom. 
Chald.  'shall  stand  vp  —  QlpO  —  another 
kingdom.'  This  is  language  which  would 
denote  something  different  from  a  succes- 
sion in  the  same  dynasty ;  for  that  would 
be  a  mere  continuance  of  the  same  hinrj- 
dom.  The  reference  is  evidently  to  a 
change  of  empire;  and  the  language  im 
plies  that  there  would  be  some  revolution 
or  conquest  by  which  the  existing  king- 
dom would  pass  away,  and  another  would 
succeed.  Still,  there  wouM  be  so  much 
of  sameness  in  respect  to  its  occupying 
essentially  the  same  territory,  that  it 
would  be  symbolized  in  the  same  image 
that  appeared  to  Nebuchadnezzar.  The 
kingdom  here  referred  to  was  undoubt- 
edly the  Medo-Persian,  established  by 
Cyrus  in  the  conquest  of  Babylon,  which 
continued  through  the  reigns  of  his  suc- 
cessors until  it  was  concjucred  by  Alex- 
ander the  Great.  This  kingdom  succeeded 
that  of  Assyria,  or  Babylon,  638  years 
B.  C,  to  the  overthrow  of  Darius  Codo- 
manus,  333  years  B.  C.  It  extended,  of 
course,  through  the  reigns  of  the  Persian 
kings,  which  acted  so  important  a  part 
in  the  invasion  of  Greece,  and  whose 
defeats  have  given  immortality  to  the 
names  of  Leonidas,  Aristides,  Miltiades, 
and  Themistocles,  and  made  the  names 
of  Salamis,  Thermopylae,  Marathon,  and 
Leuctra  so  celebrated.  For  a  general 
account  of  Cyrus,  and  the  founding  of 
the  Medo-Persian  empire,  the  reader  is 
referred  to  the  Notes  on  Isa.  xli.  2. 
^  Inferior  to  thee.  And  therefore  repre- 
sented by  silver  as  compared  with  gold. 
In  what  respects  it  would  be  inferior, 
Daniel  does  not  specify,  and  this  can  only 
be  learned  from  the  fads  which  occurred 
in  relation  to  that  kingdom.  All  that  is 
necessary  to  confirm  the  truth  of  the  pro- 
phetic description,  is,  that  it  was  to  be 
so  far  inferior  as  to  make  the  appellation 
silver  applicable  to  it  in  comparison  with 
the  kingdom  of  Babylon,  represented  by 
gold.    The  exprefision  would  denote  thai 


B.  C.  603.] 


CHAPTER   II. 


141 


and  another  third  kingdom  of  brass, 


there  was  a  general  decline  or  degene- 
racy in  the  character  of  the  monarchs, 
and  the  general  condition  of  the  empire. 
There  have  been  ditlerent  opinions  as  to 
the  inferiority  of  this  kingdom  to  the 
Babjionian.  Calvin  supposes  that  it  re- 
fers to  degeneracj';  Geir  supposes  that  it 
relates  to  the  duration  of  the  kingdom — 
this  continuing  not  more  than  two  hun- 
dred and  forty  j'ears,  while  the  other, 
including  the  Assyrian,  embraced  a  period 
of  one  thousand  five  hundred  years; 
Polanus  supposes  that  the  meaning  is, 
that  the  Babylonian  had  more  rest  and 
tranquillity;  Avhile  Junius,  Willett,  and 
others  understand  it  of  a  milder  and 
more  humane  treatment  of  the  Jews  on 
the  Babylonians  than  the  Persians.  Per- 
haps, however,  none  of  these  opinions 
meet  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  for 
they  do  not  furnish  as  full  an  account  of 
the  reasons  of  this  inferiority  as  is  de- 
sirable. In  regard  to  this,  it  may  be  ob- 
served, (or)  that  it  is  not  to  be  supposed 
that  this  kingdom  was  to  be  in  all  respects 
inferior  to  the  Babylonian,  but  only  that 
it  would  have  certain  characteristics  which 
would  make  it  more  appropriate  to  des- 
cribe it  as  silver  than  as  gold.  In  certain 
other  respects,  it  might  be  far  superior,  as 
the  Roman,  though  in  the  same  general 
line  of  succession,  was  in  extent  and 
power,  superior  to  either,  though  there 
was  still  a  reason  why  that  should  be  re- 
presented by  iron  rather  than  by  gold,  by 
silver,  or  by  brass,  (b)  The  inferiority 
did  not  relate  to  the  power,  the  riches,  or 
the  territorial  extent  of  the  Medo-Persian 
empire,  for  it  embraced,  so  far  as  appears, 
all  that  was  comprehended  in  the  Baby- 
lonian empire,  and  all  in  addition  which 
was  added  by  the  conquests  of  Cyrus.  In 
his  proclamation  to  rebuild  the  temple 
(Ezra  i.  2),  Cyrus  speaks  of  the  extent  of 
his  empire  in  language  strongly  resem- 
bling that  which  is  applied  to  the  kingdom 
of  Nebuchadnezzar.  ''  Thus  saith  Cyrus, 
king  of  Persia,  The  Lord  God  of  heaven 
hath  given  me  all  the  kingdoms  of  the 
earth."  Thus  also  it  is  said  of  Ahasuerus, 
or  Astyages,  king  of  Media  —  a  kingdom 
that  constituted  a  part  of  the  Medo- 
Persian  empire  under  Cyrus  and  his 
successors,  that  he  "reigned  from  India 
even  unto  Ethiopia,  over  an  hundred  and 
twenty  and   seven   provinces."     To  the 


which  a  shall  boar  rule  over  all  the 
earth. 


kingdom  of  Babylon,  as  he  foiled  it  wheti 
he  conquered  it,  Cyrus  of  course  added 
the  kingdoms  of  Media  and  Persia,  to  the 
crown  of  which  he  was  the  heir  (see  Notes 
on  Isji,  xli.  2),  and  also  the  various  pro- 
vinces which  he  had  conquered  before  he 
came  to  the  throne ;  that  is,  Capadocia, 
the  kingdom  of  Lydia,  and  almost  the 
whole  of  Asia  Minor,  (c)  Nor  can  it  bo 
supposed  that  the  kingdom  was  inferior 
in  regard  to  wealth,  for  in  addition  to  ^11 
the  wealth  that  Cyrus  found  in  Babylon, 
he  brought  the  spoils  of  his  victories ;  the 
treasures  in  the  possession  of  the  crowns 
of  Persia  and  Media,  and  all  the  wealth  of 
Croesus,  the  rich  king  of  Lydia,  of  which 
he  had  become  possessor  by  conquest. 
In  considering  the  inferiority/  of  this 
kingdom,  which  made  it  proper  that  it 
should  be  represented  by  silver  rather 
than  by  gold,  it  is  to  be  borne  in  mind 
that  the  representation  should  embrace 
the  whole  kingdom  in  all  the  successive 
reigns,  and  not  merely  the  kingdom  as  it 
was  under  the  administration  of  Cyrus. 
Thus  regarded,  it  will  comprehend  the 
succession  of  Persian  monarchs  until  the 
time  of  the  invasion  and  conquest  of  the 
East  by  Alexander  the  Great.  The  reign 
of  Cyrus  was  indeed  splendid,  and  if  he 
alone,  or  if  the  kingdom  during  his  ad- 
ministration, were  contemplated,  it  would 
be  difficult  to  assign  a  reason  why  an 
appellation  should  have  been  given  to  it 
impl}-ing  any  inferiority  to  that  of  Ne- 
buchadnezzar. The  inferiority  of  the 
kingdom,  or  that  which  made  it  proper  to 
represent  it  by  silver  rather  than  by  gold, 
as  compared  with  the  kingdom  of  Baby- 
lon, may  have  consisted  in  the  following 
particulars:  (1.)  In  reference  to  the  suc- 
cession of  kings  who  occupied  the  Persian 
throne.  It  is  true  that  the  character  of 
Cyrus  is  worthy  of  the  highest  commen- 
dation, and  that  he  was  distinguished  not 
only  as  a  brave  and  successful  conqueror, 
but  as  a  mild,  able,  and  upright  civil 
ruler.  Xenophon,  who  wished  to  draw 
the  character  of  a  model  prince,  made 
choice  of  Cyrus  as  the  example ;  and 
though  he  has  not  improbably  embellished 
his  character  by  ascribing  to  him  virtuea 
drawn  from  his  own  fancy  in  some  degree, 
yet  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  th« 
main  his  description  was  drawn  from  the 
life.     "  The  true  reason,"  says  PrideauXj 


142 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  603 


(Connexions,  vol.  i.  p.  252,  Ed.  Charles- 
town,  1815),  "  why  he  chose  the  life  of 
Cyrus  before  all  others  for  the  purpose 
above  mentioned"  [that  of  giving  a 
description  of  what  a  worthy  and  just 
prince  ought  to  be]  "seemcth  to  bene 
other  but  that  he  found  the  true  history 
of  that  excellent  and  gallant  prince  to  be, 
abova  all  others,  the  fittest  for  those 
maxims  of  right  policy  and  true  princely 
virtue  to  correspond  with,  which  he 
grafted  upon  it."  But  he  was  succeeded 
by  a  madman,  Cambj'ses,  and  by  a  race 
of  kings  eminent  among  princes  for  folly 
and  crime.  "The  kings  of  Persia,"  says 
Prideaux,  "were  the  worst  raee  of  men 
that  ever  governed  an  empire."  (2.)  The 
kingdom  was  inferior  in  reference  to  the 
remarkable  defeats  in  the  military  cam- 
paigns .which  were  undertaken.  The 
Assyrian,  or  Babylonian  empire  was  dis- 
tinguished for  the  victories  by  which  it 
carried  its  arms  around  the  then  known 
world.  The  Medo-Persian  empire,  after 
the  reign  of  Cyrus,  was  almost  as  remark- 
able for  the  succession  of  defeats  which 
have  made  the  period  of  the  world  during 
which  the  empire  continued,  so  well- 
known  in  history.  It  is  probable  that  no 
kingdom  ever  undertook  so  many  foolish 
projects  in  reference  to  the  conquests  of 
other  nations;  projects  so  unwisely  plan- 
ned, and  that  resulted  in  so  signal  failures. 
The  successor  of  Cyrus,  Cambyses,  in- 
vaded Egypt,  and  his  conduct  there  in 
carrying  on  the  war  was  such  as  to  make 
him  be  regarded  as  a  madman.  Enraged 
against  the  Ethiopians  for  an  answer 
which  they  gave  him  when,  under  pre- 
tence of  friendship,  he  sent  spies  to  ex- 
amine their  country,  he  resolved  to 
invade  their  country.  Having  come  to 
Thebes,  in  Upper  Egypt,  he  detached 
from  his  army  fifty  thousand  men  to  go 
against  the  Hammonians,  with  orders  to 
destroy  their  country,  and  to  burn  the 
temple  of  Jupiter  Hammon  that  stood  in 
it.  After  marching  a  few  days  in  the 
desert,  they  were  overwhelmed  in  the 
sands  by  a  strong  south  wind,  and  all 
perished.  Meantime  Cambyses  marched 
with  the  rest  of  his  army  against  the 
Ethiopians,  though  he  wanted  all  the 
means  of  subsistence  for  his  army,  until, 
having  devoured  all  their  beasts  of  bur- 
den, they  were  constrained  to  designate 
every  tenth  man  of  the  army  to  be  killed 
und  eaten.  In  these  deplorable  eircum- 
Btances,  Cambyses   returned    to   Thebes, 


having  lost  a  great  part  of  his  army  in 

this  wild  expedition.  Prideaux's  Con.  i. 
828.  It  was  also  during  the  continuance 
of  this  kingdom,  that  the  ill-starred  ex- 
peditions to  Greece  occurred,  when  Mar- 
donius  and  Xerxes  poured  the  millions  of 
Asia  on  the  countries  of  Greece,  and  met 
such  signal  overthrows  at  Platea,  Mara- 
thon, and  Salamis.  Such  a  series  of 
disasters  never  before  had  occurred  to  in- 
vading armies,  or  made  those  who  re- 
pelled invasion  so  illustrious.  In  this 
respect  there  was  an  evident  propriety  in 
speaking  of  this  as  an  inferior,  or  de- 
generate kingdom.  (3.)  It  was  inferior 
in  respect  to  the  growing  degeneracy  and 
effeminacy  of  character  and  morals. 
From  the  time  of  Xerxes  (B.  C.  479) 
"  symptoms  of  decay  and  corruption  were 
manifest  in  the  empire ,:  the  national  cha- 
racter gradually  degenerated ;  the  citizens 
were  corrupted  and  enfeebled  by  luxury  j 
and  confided  more  in  mercenary  troops 
than  in  native  valour  and  fidelity.  The 
kings  submitted  to  the  control  of  their 
wives,  or  the  creatures  whom  they  raised 
to  posts  of  distinction  ;  and  the  satraps, 
from  being  civil  functionaries,  began  to 
usurp  military  authority."  Lyman,  Hist. 
Chart.  (4.)  The  kingdom  was  inferior  by 
the  gradual  weakening  of  its  power  from 
internal  causes.  It  was  not  only  de- 
feated in  its  attempts  to  invade  others, 
and  weakened  by  the  degeneracy  of  the 
court  and  people,  but,  as  a  natural  con- 
sequence, by  the  gradual  lessening  of  the 
power  of  the  central  government,  and  tho 
growing  independence  of  the  provinces. 
From  the  time  of  Darius  Nothns  (B.  C. 
423) — a  weak,  efieminate,  and  indolent 
prince — "  the  satraps  of  the  distant  pro- 
vinces paid  only  a  nominal  obedience  to 
the  king.  Many  of  them  were,  in  fact, 
sovereigns  over  the  countries  over  which 
they  presided,  and  carried  on  wars  against 
each  other."  Lyman.  It  was  from  causes 
such  as  these  that  the  power  of  the  king- 
dom became  gradually  weakened,  and 
that  the  way  was  prepared  for  the  easy 
conquests  of  Alexander  the  Great.  Their 
successive  defeats,  and  this  gradual 
degeneracy  and  weakening  of  the  king- 
dom, show  the  propriety  of  the  descrip- 
tion given  of  the  kingdom  in  the  vision 
and  the  interpretation — that  it  would  be 
an  "inferior  kingdom,"  a  kingdom  which, 
in  comparison  with  that  of  Babylon, 
might  be  compared  with  silver  as  com- 
pared with  gold.     Still,   it  sustained  an 


B.  C.  603.J 


CHAPTER  II. 


143 


important  relation  to  tlie  progress  of 
events  in  regard  to  the  history  of  religion 
in  the  world,  and  had  an  important  bear- 
ing on  the  redemption  of  man.  As  this 
is  the  most  important  bearing  of  history, 
and  as  it  was  doubtless  with  reference  to 
this  that  the  mention  of  it  is  introduced 
into  the  sacred  Scriptures,  and  as  it  is,  in 
fact,  often  alluded  to  by  Isaiah,  and  in 
the  Books  of  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Esther, 
and  some  of  the  minor  prophets,  it 
may  be  proper,  in  the  most  summary 
way,  to  allude  to  some  of  these  things 
which  pertain  to  the  bearing  of  this 
kingdom  on  the  great  events  connected 
with  redemption,  or  to  what  was  done 
during  the  continuance  of  this  king- 
dom for  the  promotion  of  the  true  reli- 
gion. A  full  account  may  be  found  in 
Prideaux's  Connections,  part  1,  book  iii.- 
vii.  Compare  Edward's  History  of  Re- 
demption, Period  I.  part  vi.  The  par- 
ticular things  which  occurred  in  connec- 
tion with  this  kingdom  bearing  on  the 
progress  of  religion,  and  favourable  to  its 
advancement,  were  these :  (a)  the  over- 
throw of  Babylon,  so  long  the  formidable 
enemy  of  the  ancient  people  of  God ; 
(6)  The  restoration  of  the  exiles  to  their 
own  land  under  the  auspices  of  Cyrus 
(Ezra  i.  1) ;  (c)  The  re-building  of  the 
temple  under  the  same  auspices,  and  with 
the  favour  of  the  successors  of  Cyrus  ; 
((/)  The  preparation  of  the  world  for  the 
coming  of  the  Messiah,  in  the  agitations 
that  took  place  during  the  continuance  of 
the  Persian  monarchy ;  the  invasion  of 
Greece ;  the  defeats  there  ,•  the  pre- 
paration by  these  defeats  for  the  coming 
of  him  who  was  so  long  promised  as 
the  "  desire  of  all  nations."  Compare 
Hag.  ii.  7 :  "  And  I  will  shake  all  na- 
tions, and  the  desire  of  all  nations  shall 
come ;  and  I  will  fill  this  house"  [the 
temple  erected  under  the  auspices  of 
Cyrus  and  his  successors]  "  with  glory, 
saith  the  Lord  of  hosts."  There  was  a 
propriety,  therefore,  that  this  kingdom 
should  receive  a  distinct  notice  in  the 
sacred  Scriptures,  for  some  of  the  most 
important  events  connected  with  the  his- 
tory of  true  religion  in  the  world  occurred 
under  the  auspices  of  Cyrus  and  his  suc- 
cessors, and  perhaps  at  no  period  has 
there  been  more  occasion  to  recognize  the 
hand  of  God  than  in  the  influences  ex- 
erted on  the  minds  of  those  heathen 
princes  disposing  them  to  be  favourable 
to  the  long-opprjssed   children   of  God. 


^Aiid  another  third  kingdom  of  brass 
See  Notes  on  ver.  32.  The  parts  of  tho 
image  which  were  of  brass  were  the  belly 
and  thighs,  denoting  inferiorify  not  only 
to  the  head,  but  to  the  part  which  im- 
mediately preceded  it — the  breast  and  the 
arms  of  silver.  It  is  not  indeed  speci- 
fied, as  in  the  former  case,  that  this  king- 
dom would  be  inferior  to  the  former,  and 
it  is  only  from  the  position  assigned  to  it 
in  the  image,  and  the  inferior  quality  or 
the  metal  by  which  it  is  represented, 
that  it  is  implied  that  there  would  be  any 
inferiority.  There  can  be  no  reasonable 
doubt  that  by  this  third  kingdom  is  de- 
noted the  empire  founded  by  Alexander 
the  Great — the  Macedonian  empire.  It 
is  Icnown  to  all  that  he  overthrew  the 
Persian  empire,  and  established  a  king- 
dom in  the  East  embracing  substantially 
the  same  territory  which  had  been  occu- 
pied by  the  Medo-Persian  and  the  Baby- 
lonian empire.  AVhile  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  that  kingdom  is  referred  to, 
there  can  be  as  little  that  the  reference  is 
not  merely  to  the  empire  during  the  reign 
of  Alexander  himself,  but  that  it  em- 
braced the  whole  empire  as  founded  and 
arranged  by  him,  until  it  was  succeeded 
by  another  universal  empire — here  de- 
nominated the  fourth  kingdom.  The  rea- 
sons for  supposing  that  tho  Maoedouiau 
empire  is  referred  to  here  are  almost  too 
obvious  to  require  that  they  should  be 
specified.  They  are  such  as  these : 
(1.)  This  kingdom  actually  succeeded 
that  of  Medo-Persia,  covering  the  same 
territor}-,  and,  like  that,  was  then  un- 
derstood to  be  a  universal  monarchy. 
(2)  The  empire  of  Alexander  is  elsewhere 
more  than  once  referred  to  by  Daniel  in 
the  same  order,  and  in  such  a  manner 
that  the  sense  cannot  be  mistaken.  Thus 
in  ch.  viii.  21 :  "  And  the  rough  goat  is 
the  king  of  Grecia  :  and  the  great  horn 
that  is  between  his  eyes  is  the  first  king. 
Now  that  being  broken,  wheraas  four 
stood  up  for  it,  four  kingdoms  shall  stand 
up  out  of  his  nation,  but  not  in  his 
power."  Ch.  x.  20:  "And  now,"  said 
the  man  that  appeared  in  vision  to  Daniel 
(ver.  5,)  "will  I  return  to  fight  with  tho 
prince  of  Persia ;  and  when  I  am  gone 
forth,  lo,  the  prince  of  Grecia  shall  come." 
Ch.  xi.  2 — 4:  "  And  now  will  I  show  tboo 
the  truth.  Behold  there  shall  stand  up 
yet  three  kings  in  Persia;  and  the  fourth 
shall  be  far  richer  than  they  all :  and  by 
his  strength  through  his  riches  he  shall 


144 


DANIEL. 


[B.C.  603. 


Btir  up  all  against  tho  realm  of  Grecia. 
And  a  mighty  king  shiill  stand  up,  that 
sliall  rule  with  great  dominion,  and  do 
according  to  his  will.  And  when  he  shall 
stand  up,  his  kingdom  shall  be  broken, 
and  shall  be  divided  toward  the  four  winds 
of  heaven,  and  not  to  his  posterity,  nor 
according  to  the  kingdom  that  he  ruled; 
for  his  kingdom  shall  be  plucked  up,  even 
for  others  besides  those."  Since  this 
kingdom  is  thus  referred  to  elsewhere  by 
Daniel  in  the  same  order,  and  as  destined 
to  act  an  important  part  in  the  affairs  of 
the  world,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that 
there  is  a  reference  to  it  here.  (3.)  It  is 
a  circumstance  of  some  importance  that 
the  emblem  here  by  which  this  kingdom 
is  represented,  brass,  is  one  that  is  pecu- 
liarly appropriate  to  the  Greeks,  and  one 
that  could  not  be  applied  to  any  other 
nation  with  ejijual  propriety.  The  Greeks 
were  distinguished  for  their  brazen  ar- 
mor, and  the  appellation  the  brazen  coated 
Greeks — X''Xfo.\;irwi'£j  'A\:ai«i — is  that  by 
which  they  were  designated  most  com- 
monly b}'  the  Ancients.  II.  i.  371,ii.  47; 
Od.  i.  286.  In  accordance  with  this, 
Josephus  saj's,  (Ant.  B.  x.  c.  10,  §4) 
Triv  6i  iKiiftJi'  'ircpoiTK  and  6iatcoi  Kiiimjjfian 
XaXKou  riiiipicaixhos — '  their  empire  another 
shall  come  from  the  West,  CLOTHED  WITH 
BRASS,  shall  destroy.'  These  considera- 
tions leave  no  doubt  that  the  kingdom 
here  referred  to  was  that  Grecian  or 
Macedonian,  which,  under  Alexander, 
obtnained  dominion  over  all  the  East. 
^  Which  shall  bear  ride  over  all  the  earth. 
In  a  sense  similar  to  that  of  the  Assyrian, 
the  Babylonian,  and  the  Medo-Persian 
empire.  This  is  the  common  description 
of  the  empire  of  Alexander,  He,  him- 
self, commanded  that  he  should  be  called 
the  king  of  all  the  world : — Accepto  delude 
imperio,  regem  se  terrarum  omnium  ac 
mundi  appellari  jussit  (Justin.  L.  12,  c. 
16  g9) — 'Having  received  the  empire, 
he  ordered  himself  to  be  called  the  king 
of  all  lands,  and  of  the  world.'  Diodorus 
Siculus  says  that  he  received  ambassadors 
from  all  countries.  KaTo.  ii  tovtov  tov 
Xpavov,  tj  drruo-^j  oX^^ov  rtji  oiKoviici'in  ^ikov 
TTpeaStii,  K.  7.  A.  'At  which  time,  legates 
came  to  him  from  almost  the  whole  habit- 
able world.'  L.  17,  c.  113.  So  Arrian 
(Expedi.  Alex.  L.  7,  c.  15,)  remarks  that 
'Aiesander  then  appeared  to  himself  and 
to  those  around  him,  to  be  lord  of  all  the 
earth  and  of  the  sea — yijj  rt  an-iijrjf  khX 
i,i\laatis   Kvptov.     The  author  of  the  Book 


of  Maccabees  gives  a  similar  account  of 
the  extent  of  this  kingdom  : — "  And  it 
came  to  pass,  after  that  Alexander,  the 
son  of  Philip,  the  Macedonian,  who  first 
reigned  in  Greece,  had  overthrown  Darivss, 
the  king  of  the  Persian  and  Medes,  he 
fought  many  battles,  and  took  the  strong- 
holds of  all,  and  slew  the  kings  of  the 
earth;  and  he  went  through  even  to  the 
ends  of  the  earth  ;  and  took  the  spoil  of 
many  nations;  and  the  earth  was  quiet 
before  him."  1  Mac.  i.  1 — 3.  The  pro- 
priety of  saying  that  this  "  kingdom  bore 
rule  over  all  the  earth,"  is,  therefore,  ap- 
parent. It  embraced,  of  course,  all  that 
was  anciently  included  in  the  Assyrian 
and  Babylonian  empires ;  all  that  had 
been  added  to  that  empire  by  the  con- 
quests of  Cyrus,  and  also  all  that  Alex- 
ander had  added  to  it  by  his  hereditary 
dominions,  and  by  his  conquests  in  other 
places.  Nearly  or  quite  all  the  known 
world,  except  that  which  was  then  sub- 
ject to  the  Romans,  then  just  a  rising 
power,  was  under  the  sway  of  Alexander. 
A  question  has  been  started  whether  this 
refers  merely  to  the  kingdom  of  Alex- 
ander, during  his  own  life,  or  whether  it 
embraced  also  the  succession  of  dj'nasties 
until  the  conquests  of  the  Romans.  That 
the  latter  is  the  correct  opinion  seems 
clear  from  the  following  considerations  : 
(1.)  It  was  true,  as  we  have  seen,  of  the 
two  previous  kingdoms  specified — tho 
Babylonian,  and  the  Medo-Persian  — 
that  they  embraced  not  merely  the  king- 
dom under  any  one  reigning  monarch, 
but  during  its  entire  continuance  until  it 
was  overthrown  by  one  that  had  also 
pretensions  to  a  universal  empire — tho 
former  by  the  Medo-Persian,  and  the  lat- 
ter by  the  Macedonian.  It  is  to  be  pre- 
sumed that  the  same  principles  of  inter- 
pretation are  to  be  applied  also  to  the 
Macedonian  kingdom  itself — especially 
as  that  was  also  actually  succeeded  by 
one  that  in  a  still  higher  sense  laid  claim 
to  universal  empire.  (2.)  This  was  in 
fact  one  kingdom.  It  is  true  that  on  the 
death  of  Alexander,  the  empire  which  he 
founded  was  divided  among  four  of  his 
generals,  and  also  that  from  that  sprung 
the  two  reigns  the  Seleucidae  in  Syria, 
and  of  the  Lagidae  who  reigned  in  Egypt, 
but,  as  Newton  has  remarked,  "their 
kingdom  was  no  more  a  different  kingdom 
from  that  of  Alexander,  than  the  parts 
differ  from  the  whole.  It  was  the  same 
government  still   continued.     Those  who 


B.  C.  G03.] 


CHAPTER    II. 


145 


governed   were   still    Macedonians.      All 
ancients  authors   spoke  of  the  kingdom 
of  Alexander  and  of  his  successors  as  one 
and    the    same    kingdom.     The   thing  is 
implied  in  the  very  name  by  which  they 
are  usually  called,  the  successors  of  Alex- 
ander.     '  Alexander   being    dead,'   says 
Joscphus,    (Ant.    B.  xi.  ch.  8,  §  7,)  'the 
empire  was  divided  among  his  successors.' 
After  the  death  of  Alexander,'  says  Jus- 
tin,  (Lib.   xli.  c.   4,  §1,)  'the  kingdoms 
of  the  East  were  divided  among  his  suc- 
cessors ;'  and  he  still  denominates  them 
Macedonians,  and  their  empire  the  Mace- 
donian."     Newton    on    the    Prophecies, 
pp.   189,   I'.IO.     In   regard   to    the   point 
before    adverted    to   in   reference  to  the 
kingdoms  of  Babylon  and  of  Medo-Persia 
— the  relation    which  they  sustained  to 
religion,  or  the  methotls    in  which  they 
were  made  to  contribute  to  its  progress  in 
the  world,  making   it   proper   that   they 
should  be  noticed  in  the  volume  of  in- 
spiration, it  may  be  remarked  that  the 
Macedonian  kingdom  was  also  designed, 
undoubtedly,  under  an  overruling  Provi- 
dence, to  contribute  to  the  progregs  of 
the   great   work    of  human   redemption, 
and  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  coming 
of  the    Messiah.      A   full   statement   of 
tvbat  was  done  under  this  reign  in  ro- 
tpect  to  religion — the   most   interesting 
ispcct  of  history — may  be  seen  in  Ed- 
ivard's  History  of  Redemption,  pp.  271 — 
lib,  and  in  Prideaux's  Connexion,  vol. 
2,  page  279,  seq.     The  kingdom  hero  re 
ferred  to — the    Macedonian,  represented 
here  by  the  portion  of  the  imago  that  was 
of  brass,  and  in  the  vision  of  the  four 
beasts  (ch.  vii.)  by  a  leopard  that  had  on 
its  back  the  wings  of  a  fowl,  and  in  cb. 
viii.  21,  by  the  rough  goat,  continued  from 
the  overthrow  of  Darius  Codomanus  by 
Alexander,  (B.  C.  333,)  to  the  conquest 
of  Syria,  and  the   East  by  the  Romans 
under  Pompe5',  about  sixty-six  years  be- 
fore the  birth  of  the  Saviour.     The  prin- 
cipal events  during  this  period  afiecting 
the  interests  of  religion,   and  preparing 
the  way  for  the  coming  of  tlie   i\Iessiah, 
were   the    following : — I.    The    extensive 
diffusion  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Greek 
language.     The  army  of  Alexander  was 
mainly  composed  of  Greeks.     The  Greek 
language  was,  of  course,  that  which  was 
spoken  hy  the  court,  and   in    the    cities 
which  he  founded ;  the  despatches  were 
in  Greek  ;  that  language  would  be  exten- 
iivelv  cultivated  to  gratify  those  in  power; 
13 


and   Ihe   successors  of    Alexander   were 
those  who  used  the  Greek  tongue.     The 
consequence  was,  that  the  Greek  language 
was    extensively  spread   over  the   coun- 
tries which  were  subdued   by  Alexander, 
and  which  were  governed  by  tis  succes- 
sors.    That  language  became  the  popular 
tongue;    a   sort   of    universal    language 
understood  by  the  great  mass  of  the  peo- 
ple, in  a  manner  not  unlike  the  French 
in  Europe  at  the  present  day.     The  effect 
of  this,  in  preparing  for  the  introduction 
of  the  gospel,  was  seen  in  two  respects  : 
(a)  in    facilitating   the  preaching   of  the 
gospel.     It  is  true  that  the  apostles  had 
the  gift  of  tongues,  and  that  there  waa, 
notwithstanding    the    prevalence   of  tb.o 
Greek  language,  occasion  for  this.     P/Ut 
there  is  no   evidence  that  this  was   con- 
ferred on  ail  the  early  preachers  ol'  the 
gospel,  nor  is   it   certain   that   these    on 
whom  it  was  conferred  were  able  to  mako 
use  of  it  on  all  occasions.     It  is  not  im- 
probable that  in  their  ordinary  labors  the 
apostles  and  others  were  left  to  rely  on 
their  natural  endowments,  and  to  use  the 
language  to  which   they  had  been  mos. 
accustomed.     As  there  was,  therefore,  a 
common  language  in  most  of  the  countries 
in  which  the  gospel  would  be  proclaimed, 
it  is  evident  that  the  propagation  of  reli- 
gion would  be  greatly  facilitated  by  this, 
and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  was  one 
of  the  designs  of  Providence  in  permitting 
the  Macedonian  conquest  thus  to  prepare 
the  way  for  the  more  easy  and  rapid  dif- 
fusion of  the  new  religion,     (h)  In  like 
manner,  this  conquest  prepared  the  way 
for  the  permanent  record  of  the  history  of 
the  Saviour's  life,  and  the  doctrines  of 
religion  in  the  writings  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament.    It  was   evidently  desirable,  on 
many  accounts,  that  the  records  should 
be  made  in  one  language  rather  than  in 
many,    and   of    all   the   languages    then 
spoken  on  the  earth,  the   Greek  was  tho 
best  adapted  to  such  a  purpose.     It  waa 
not   only  the   most   polished   and  culti- 
vated, but  it  was  the  most  copious ;  and 
it  was  the  best  fitted  to  express  abstract 
ideas,  and   accurate  distinctions.       Pro- 
bably with  all  the    improvements  since 
made   in    the    copious  Arabic   language, 
and  in  the  languages  of  modern  times, 
there  never  has  been  one  that  was  so  well 
fitted  for  the  purposes  of  a  divine  revela- 
tion as  the  Greek.     It  may  have  been  one 
design    of  Providence   in   the    extensive 
and  accurate  cultivation  of  that  language 


146 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  603 


tn  Greece  itself,  as  well  as  in  its  diffusion 
Dvcr  the  ■world,  that  there  should  be  at 
the  time  of  the  introduction  of  the  Chris- 
tian revelation  a  medium  of  permanent 
record,  that  should  be  as  free  from  imper- 
fection as  language  could  be ;  a  medium 
rtlso  in  which  there  should  be  so  much 
permanent  and  valuable  literature  that 
even  after  it  should  cease  to  be  a  spoken 
Linguage,  would  be  cultivated  by  the 
whole  literary  world,  thus  furnishing  the 
means  of  an  accurate  knowledge  of  the 
meaning  of  the  sacred  writings.  II.  The 
translation  of  the  Old  Testament  into 
the  same  language,  was  another  impor- 
tant event  which  took  place  during  the 
continuance  of  this  kingdom  which  greatly 
facilitated  the  introduction  and  spread 
of  Christianity.  The  Hebrew  language 
was  understood  by  comparatively  few. 
It  ceased  to  be  spoken  in  its  purity  after 
the  time  of  the  captivity.  In  that  lan- 
guage the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment would  have  been  but  little  diffused 
in  the  world.  By  their  being  translated, 
however,  into  Greek,  they  became  exten- 
sively known,  and  furnished  a  ready  and 
an  intelligible  ground  of  appeal  to  the 
preachers  of  the  new  religion  when  they 
referred  to  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, and  the  recorded  predictions  of 
the  Messiah.  For  a  full  account  of  the 
history  of  this  version,  the  reader  tnny 
consult  Prideaux's  Connexion,  vol.  iii. 
p.  63,  seq.  It  was  made,  according  to 
Archbishop  Usher,  about  277  B.  C  .  The 
probability  is,  that  it  was  made  at  dif- 
ferent periods,  and  by  different  hands, 
as  it  is  executed  with  very  various  degrees 
of  ability.  See  Intro,  to  Isaiah,  ^  viii.  I. 
(1),  for  a  more  extended  account  of  this 
version  and  its  value.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  it  contributed  much  to  the  dif- 
fusion of  the  knowledge  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  and  was  an  important  instru- 
ment in  preparing  the  world  for  the  recep- 
tion of  the  revelation  that  should  be  made 
by  the  Messiah.  III.  Events  of  great 
importance  occurred  during  the  continu- 
ance of  this  kingdom  in  preserving  the 
Jewish  people  in  times  of  persecution,  and 
saving  their  city  and  temple  from  ruin, 
and  their  nation  from  extinction,  (a)  The 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  tem- 
ple was  threatened  by  Alexander  himself. 
After  the  siege  and  capture  of  Tyre,  he 
became  enraged  at  the  Jews  for  refusing 
4o  furnish  supplies  for  his  army  during 
\ho  siege,  under  the  plea  that  they  were 


bound  to  show  allegiance  to  Darius,  and 
he  marched  to  Jerusalem  with  an  inten- 
tion to  take  and  destroy  it.  In  order  to 
appease  him,  it  is  said  that  Jaddua,  the 
high  priest,  went  out  to  meet  him  in  hi.i 
pontifical  robes,  at  the  head  of  a  proces- 
sion of  jiriests,  and  accompanied  with  the 
people  in  white  garments.  Alexander 
was  so  impressed  with  the  scene,  that,  to 
the  surprise  of  all,  he  spared  the  city 
and  temple,  and  on  being  asked  by  Par- 
menio  the  reason  of  this  clemency,  said 
that  he  had  seen  this  person  in  vision, 
who  had  directed  him  to  lay  aside  all 
anxiety  about  his  contemplated  expedition 
to  Asia,  and  that  he  had  jn'omised  that 
God  would  give  him  the  empire  of  the 
Persians.  According  to  the  storj',  Jaddua 
showed  him  the  prophecies  of  Daniel,  and 
confirmed  him  by  those  prophecies  in  the 
confident  expectation  of  conquering  the 
East,  and  in  view  of  this  Alexander 
offered  sacrifices  in  the  temple,  and 
granted  to  the  Hebrews  the  freedom  of 
their  countrj-,  and  the  exercise  of  their 
laws  and  religion.  See  Prideaux,  vol.  ii. 
p.  302,  seq. ;  Josephus,  Ant.  B.  ii.  ch.  8. 
Whatever  of  fable  there  may  be  in  this 
account,  it  is  certain  that  the  city  and 
temple  were  not  destroyed  by  Alexander, 
but  that  in  his  ravages  in  the  East  he  was 
led,  by  some  cause,  to  deal  with  the 
capital  of  the  Hebrew  nation  in  a  manner 
different  from  what  he  did  with  others, 
(i)  A  remarkable  preservation  of  the  Jew- 
ish people,  of  a  somewhat  similar  cha- 
racter, and  evincing  the  protection  of  God, 
occurred  during  the  great  persecution 
under  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  one  of  the 
successors  of  Alexander,  in  the  time  of  the 
Maccabees.  See  Prideaux,  vol.  iii.  p. 
230,  and  2  Maccabees,  v.  11-27.  In  the 
times  of  that  celebrated  persecution,  mul- 
titudes of  the  Jews  were  slain  by  Antfo- 
chus  himself,  the  city  was  taken,  and  the 
temple  defiled.  Three  j'ears  after  it  was 
taken  by  Antiochus  (B.  C.  168),  Apollo- 
nius  was  directed  bj'  him  to  march 
against  the  city  to  vent  his  wrath  on  the 
Jews,  and  when  the  people  were  assem- 
bled in  their  synagogues  for  worship,  ho 
let  loose  his  forces  on  them,  with  a  com- 
mand to  slay  all  the  men,  and  to  take  all 
the  women  and  children  captives  to  bo 
sold  as  slaves.  After  this,  he  plundered 
the  city,  demolished  the  houses,  and  pulled 
down  the  walls,  and  then  with  the  ruins 
of  the  demolished  city  built  a  strong  for- 
tress on  the  top  of  an  eminence  in  the 


B.C.  003.]  CHAPTER  II.  147 

40  And  the  fourth  kintrdom  shall    be   strong  as   iron :   forasmuch  as 


city  of  David,  in  a  place  which  over- 
looked the  temple,  and  placed  a  strong 
garrison  within.  Prom  this  place,  attacks 
were  made  on  all  who  went  up  to  the  tem- 
ple to  worship,  and  the  temple  was  defiled 
with  all  manner  of  pollutions,  until  it  was 
deserted,  and  the  daily  sacrifices  ceased. 
From  these  calamities  and  persecutions, 
the  city  and  the  Jewish  nation  were 
delivered  by  the  valour  of  Judas  Macca- 
beus, in  the  manner  detailed  in  the  First 
Book  of  Maccabees. 

40.  And  the  fourth  ki/igdom.  Repre- 
sented in  the  image  by  the  legs  of  iron, 
and  the  feet  "  part  of  iron,  and  part  of 
clay."  ver.  33.  The  first  question  which 
arises  here  is,  what  kingdom  is  referred  to 
by  this  ?  In  regard  to  this,  there  have 
been  two  leading  opinions ;  one,  that  it 
refers  to  the  Roman  empire ;  the  other, 
that  it  refers  to  the  kingdoms  or  dynasties 
that  immediately  succeeded  the  reign  of 
Alexander  the  Great;  embracing  the  king- 
doms of  the  Seleueidre  and  Lagida?, 
Syria  and  Egypt — in  the  language  of 
Prof.  Stuart,  who  adopts  this  opinion, 
"  that  the  legs  and  feet  were  symbols  of 
that  intermingled  and  confused  empire, 
which  sprung  up  under  the  (irecian  chiefs 
who  finally  succeeded  him,''  [Alexander 
the  Great].  Com.  on  Daniel,  p.  173.  For 
the  reasoning  by  which  this  opinion  is 
supported,  see  Prof.  Stuart,  pp.  173-193. 
The  common  opinion  h.is  been,  that  the 
reference  is  to  the  Roman  empire,  and  in 
support  of  this  opinion  the  following  con- 
ditions may  be  suggested:  (1.)  The  obvious 
design  of  the  image  was  to  symbolize  the 
succession  of  great  monarchies,  which 
would  precede  the  setting  up  of  the 
kingdom  of  the  Redeemer,  and  which 
would  have  an  important  agency  in  pre- 
paring the  world  for  that.  The  Roman 
empire  was  in  itself  too  important,  and 
performed  too  important  an  agency  in 
preparing  the  world  for  that,  to  be  omitted 
ia  such  an  enumeration.  (2.)  The  king- 
dom here  referred  to  was  to  be  in  exist- 
ence at  the  time  symbolized  by  the  cut- 
ting of  the  stone  out  of  the  mountain; 
for  during  the  continuance  of  that  king- 
dom, or  under  it,  "  the  God  of  heaven  was 
to  set  up  a  kingdom  which  should  never 
be  destroyed."  ver.  44.  But  the  king- 
doms of  tlie  Seleucidffi  and  the  Lagids — 
the  'intermingled  and  confused  empires 
that  sprang  up'  after  Alexander  the  Great 


— had  ceased  before  that  timo,  being  su- 
perseded by  the  Roman.  (3.)  Unless  the 
Roman  power  be  represented,  the  sym- 
metry of  the  image  is  destroyed ;  for  it 
would  make  what  was  in  fact  one  king- 
dom, represented  by  two  different  metala 
— brass  and  iron.  We  have  seen  above 
that  the  Babylonian  empire  was  repre- 
sented appropriately  by  gold ;  the  Mcdo- 
Persian  by  silver;  and  the  Macedonian 
by  brass.  We  have  seen  also,  that  in  fact 
the  empire  founded  by  Alexander,  and 
continued  through  his  successors  in  Syria 
and  Egypt,  was  in  fact  one  kingdom,  so 
spoken  of  by  the  ancients,  and  being  in 
fact  a  Greek  dynasty.  If  the  appellation 
of  trass  belonged  to  that  kingdom  as  a 
Greek  kingdom,  there  is  an  obvious  in- 
congruity, and  a  departure  from  the 
method  of  interpreting  the  other  portions 
of  the  image,  in  applying  the  term  iron 
to  any  portion  of  that  kingdom.  (4.)  By 
the  application  of  the  term  iron,  it  is  evi- 
dently implied  that  the  kingdom  thus 
referred  to  would  be  distinguished  for 
strength  —  strength  greater  than  its  pre- 
decessors—  as  iron  surpasses  brass,  and 
silver,  and  gold,  in  that  quality.  But 
this  was  not  true  of  the  confused  reigns 
that  immediately  followed  Alexander. 
They  were  unitedly  weaker  than  the 
Bab}-lonian  and  the  Medo-Persian,  and 
weaker  than  the  empire  of  Alexander,  out 
of  which  they  arose.  Comp.  ch.  viii.  21, 
22.  It  loas  true,  however,  of  the  Roman 
power,  that  it  was  so  much  superior  to  all 
its  predecessors  in  power,  that  it  might 
well  be  represented  by  iron  in  comparison 
with  brass,  silver,  and  gold.  (5.)  The 
fourth  monarchy  represented  in  Nebu- 
chadnezzar's dream  is  evidently  the  sam? 
which  is  represented  by  the  fourth  beast 
in  Dan.  vii.  7,  8,  23,  25.  But  it  will 
appear,  from  the  exposition  of  that  chap- 
ter, that  the  reference  there  is  to  the 
Roman  empire.  See  Notes  on  these  pas- 
sages. There  can  be  no  well-founded 
objection  *  1  this  view  on  the  ground  that 
this  kingdom  was  not  properly  a  iiieces- 
sion  of  the  kingdom  of  Alexander,  and 
did  not  occupy  precisely  the  same  terri- 
tory. The  same  was  true  of  each  of  the 
other  kingdoms — the  Medo-Persian,  and 
Macedonian.  Yet  while  they  were  not, 
in  the  usual  sense  of  the  terra,  in  the  «-!ic- 
cession,  they  did  in  fact  follow  one  after 
the    other,  and  with   such  accessions  as 


148 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  603 


iron   breakcth   in  pieces   and  sub-  I      41  And  -whereas  thou  sawest  th(j 
dueth  all  tJiings :   and  as  iron  that    feet  and  toes,  part  of  potter's  clay, 


breaketh  all  these,  shall  it  break  in 
pieces  and  bruise. 

were  derived  from  conquest,  and  from  the 
hereditary  dominions  of  the  conquerors, 
they  did  occupy  the  same  territorj\  The 
de&ign  seems  to  have  been  to  give  a  re- 
presentation of  a  series  of  great  mo- 
narchies, which  would  be,  in  an  important 
sense,  universal  monarchies,  and  which 
should  follow  each  other  before  the  advent 
of  the  Saviour.  The  Roman,  in  addition 
to  what  it  possessed  in  the  West,  actually 
occupied  in  the  East,  substantially  the 
same  territory  as  the  Babylonian,  the 
Medo-Persian,  and  the  Macedonian,  and 
like  them  it  had  all  the  claims  which  any 
ancient  sovereignty  had  to  the  title  of  an 
universal  monarchy.  Indeed  no  kingdom 
has  ever  existed  to  which  this  title  could 
with  more  justice  be  applied.  ^  Shall  he 
strong  as  iron.  It  is  scarcely  necessary 
to  observe  that  this  description  is  ap- 
plicable to  the  Homan  power.  In  nothing 
was  it  more  remarkable  than  iis  strength  ; 
for  that  irresistible  power  before  which 
all  other  nations  were  perfectly  weak. 
This  characteristic  of  the  Roman  power  is 
thus  noticed  by  Mr.  Gibbon  : — "  The  arms 
of  the  Republic,  sometimes  vanquished  in 
battle,  always  victorious  in  war,  advanced 
with  rapid  steps  to  the  Euphrates,  the 
Danube,  the  Rhine,  and  the  ocean ;  and 
the  images  of  gold,  or  silver,  or  brass, 
that  might  serve  to  represent  the  nations 
and  their  kings,  were  successively  broken 
by  the  iron  monarchy  of  Rome."  Dec. 
and  Fall,  p.  642,  Lond.  ed.  1S30,  as 
quoted  by  Prof.  E::sh.  *f  Forasmuch  as 
iron  hreaheth  in  jiicccs  and  suhdueth  all 
things.  Iron  is  the  metal  which  is  used, 
and  always  has  been  used,  for  the  purpose 
here  suggested.  In  the  form  of  hammers, 
sledges,  and  cannon-b.alls,  and  in  general 
in  reference  to  the  accomplishment  of  any 
purpose,  by  beating  or  battering,  this  has 
been  found  to  be  the  most  valuable  of  the 
metals.  It  is  heavy ;  is  cap.able  of  being 
easily  wrought  into  desired  shapes ;  ^is 
abundant;  is  susceptible  of  being  made 
hard  so  as  not  to  be  itself  bruised,  and 
has,  therefore,  all  the  properties  which 
could  be  desired  for  purposes  like  this. 
*^  And  as  iron  that  breaketh  all  these. 
That  is,  all  these  things ;  to  wit,  every- 
thing. Nothing  is  able  to  stand  before  it; 
xhej*  is  nothing  which  it  cannot  reduce  to 


and  part  of  iron,  the  kingdom 
shall  be   divided ;    but   there   shall 

powder.  There  is  some  repetition  here, 
but  it  is  for  the  sake  of  emphasis.  5f  Shali 
it  break  in  j^ieccs  and  bruise.  Nothing 
could  better  characterise  the  Roman  power 
than  this.  Everything  was  crushed  be- 
fore it.  The  nations  which  they  con- 
quered ceased  to  be  kingdoms,  and  were 
reduced  to  provinces,  and  as  kingdoms 
they  were  blotted  out  from  the  list  of 
nations.  This  has  been  well  described  by 
Mr.  Irving :  "  The  Roman  empire  did 
beat  down  the  constitution  and  establish- 
ment of  all  other  kingdoms ;  abolishing 
their  independence,  and  bringing  thcia 
into  the  most  entire  subjection  ;  humbling 
the  pride,  subjecting  the  will,  using  the 
property,  and  trampling  upon  the  power 
and  dignity  of  all  other  states.  For  by 
this  was  the  Roman  dominion  distin- 
guished from  all  the  rest,  that  it  was  the 
work  of  almost  as  many  centuries  as  thosa 
were  of  j'ears ;  the  fruit  of  a  thousand 
battles,  in  which  millions  of  men  were 
slain.  It  made  room  for  itself  as  doth  a 
battering-ram,  by  continual  successive 
blows ;  and  it  ceased  not  to  beat  and 
bruise  all  nations,  so  long  as  they  con- 
tinued to  offer  any  resistance.  Disc,  on 
Dan.  Visions,  p.  180. 

41.  And  tchereas  thou  sawest  the  feet 
and  toes  part  of  potter' n  duij,  and  p)art  of 
iron.  Ver.  33.  The  Chaldee  is,  '  of  them 
clay  of  the  potter,  and  of  them  iron  ;'  that 
is,  part  was  composed  of  one  material,  and 
part  of  the  other.  The  sense  is  not  that 
the  feet  were  composed  entirely  of  one, 
and  the  toes  of  the  other,  but  that  they 
were  intermingled.  There  was  no  homo- 
geneousness  of  material ;  nothing  in  one 
that  would  coalesce  with  the  other,  or  that 
could  be  permanently  united  to  it,  as  two 
metals  might  be  fused  or  welded  together, 
and  form  one  solid  compound.  Iron  and 
clay  cannot  be  welded ;  and  the  idea  here 
clearly  is,  that  in  the  empire  here  referred 
to  there  would  be  two  main  elements 
which  could  never  be  made  to  blend. 
^  'The  kingdom  shall  he  divided.  That  is, 
divided  as  the  iron  and  clay  were  in  the 
image.  It  does  not  necessarily  mean  that 
there  would  be  an  open  rupture  ;  an  actual 
separation  into  two  parts,  but  that  there 
would  bo  such  a  diversity  in  the  internal 
constitution  that,  while  there  would  be  the 


B.  C.  603,1 


CHAPTER   II. 


149 


bo  in  it  of  the  strength  of  the  iron, 
forasmuch  as  thou  sawest  the  iron 
u>ixed  Avith  miry  chiy. 

42  And   as   the  toes  of  the  feet 


clement  of  great  power,  tbere  would  be 
also  an  element  of  weakness  :  there  would 
be  fiomething  which  could  never  be 
blended  with  the  element  of  strength,  so 
as  to  produce  one  harmonious  and  homo- 
geneous whole.  *l  But  there  shall  be  in  it 
of  the  strenr/th  of  the  iron,  forasmuch  as 
thou  sawest  the  iron  mixed  with  miry  clay. 
The  principal  idea  in  this  part  of  the 
description,  is,  that  there  would  be  great 
power;  that  whatever  elements  of  weak- 
ness there  might  be,  yet  the  jiowcr  of  the 
empire  would  be  apparent.  No  one  can 
f;vil  to  perceive  how  this  applies  to  the 
Roman  empire;  a  mighty  power  which, 
through  all  its  long  history,  was  dis- 
tinguished for  the  vigour  with  which  it 
carried  forward  its  plans,  and  pressed  on 
to  universal  dominion.  As  to  the  ele- 
ment of  weakness  symbolized  too  by  the 
clay,  it  may  not  be  possible  to  determine, 
with  absolute  certainty,  what  is  referred 
to.  Any  internal  source  of  weakness  ; 
anything  in  the  constitution  of  the  state, 
whether  originally  existing  and  consti- 
tuting heterogeneous  material ;  or  whether 
springing  up  in  the  empire  itself,  or 
whether  arising  from  the  intermingling 
of  foreign  elements  that  never  amalga- 
mated themselves  with  the  state,  any  one 
of  these  suppositions  would  meet  all  that 
is  fairly  implied  in  this  language.  From 
ver.  43,  "they  shall  mingle  themselves 
with  the  seed  of  men,"  it  would  seem, 
however,  that  the  reference  is  to  some 
foreiyn  admixture  —  like  the  interming- 
ling of  nations  of  other  languages,  laws 
and  customs  which  were  never  truly 
amalgamated  with  the  original  materials, 
and  which  constantly  tended  to  weaken 
and  divide  the  kingdom.  It  is  to  be  re- 
marked, in  the  exposition  of  the  passage, 
that  in  the  previous  three  kingdoms  there 
was  comparative  homogeneousness.  In 
the  fourth  kingdom,  there  was  to  be 
something  of  a  peculiar  character  in  this 
respect  by  which  it  should  be  distinguish- 
ed from  the  others.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
the  other  three  kingdoms  were  com- 
paratively homogeneous  in  their  cha- 
racter. The  predominant  feature  was 
Oriental;  and  though  there  were  dif- 
ferent nations  and  people  intermingled  in 
the  Babylonian,  the  Medo-Persian,  and 
13* 


ivere  part  of  iron,  and  part  of  clay, 
so  the  kingdom  shall  bo  partly 
strong,  and  partly  »  broken. 

»  Brilllc. 


the  Macedonian  kingdoms,  yet  there  was 
the  same  general  prevailing  character  in 
each ;  there  was  not  such  an  intermin- 
gling of  foreign  nations  as  to  produce 
disturbing  elements,  or  to  mar  the  sym- 
metry and  strength  of  the  whole.  It  was 
not  thus  with  Rome.  In  that  empire 
there  was  the  intermingling  of  all  nations 
and  tongues,  and  though  the  essential 
element  of  the  empire  remained  always — ■ 
the  Roman, — yet  there  was  an  intermin- 
gling of  other  influences  under  the  same 
general  government,  which  could  be  ap- 
propriately compared  with  clay  united 
with  iron,  and  which  ultimately  con- 
tributed to  its  fall.  See  Notes  on  ver.  43. 
42.  j4H(?as  the  toes  of  the  feet  were  ^jari 
of  iron  and  2iart  of  clay,  so  the  Icingdom 
shall  be  2}(i>'tly  strong  and  partly  broken, 
Marg.  brittle.  The  margin  is  the  more 
correct  rendering  of  the  Chaldee  word— 
i^T'^^ri .  It  meams  frail,  fragile, — easily 
broken,  but  not  necessarily  that  it  was 
actually  broken.  That  did  not  occur 
until  the  stone  cut  out  of  the  mountain 
impinged  on  it.  It  has  been  commonly 
supposed  (comp.  Newton  on  the  Prophe- 
cies), that  the  ten  toes  on  the  feet  refer  to 
the  ten  kingdoms  into  which  the  Roman 
empire  was  ultimately  broken  up,  cor- 
responding with  the  ten  horns  seen  in  the 
vision  of  Daniel,  in  ch.  vii.  10.  In  regard 
to  the  fact  that  the  Roman  empire  was 
ultimately  broken  up  into  ten  such  king- 
doms, see  the  extended  Notes  on  ch.  vii. 
24.  The  thing  which  struck  the  monarch 
in  the  vision,  and  Daniel  in  interpreta- 
tion, as  remarkable,  was  that  the  feet  and 
toes  were  composed  pi'^^'tly  of  iron  and 
partly  of  clay.  In  the  upper  portion  of 
the  image  there  had  been  uniformity  in 
the  different  parts,  and  had  been  no  inter- 
mingling of  metals.  Hero  a  new  feature 
was  seen — not  only  that  a  new  metal  was 
employed,  but  that  there  was  inter- 
mingled with  that,  in  the  same  portion  of 
the  image,  a  different  substance,  and  on; 
that  had  no  affinity  with  the  iron,  and' 
that  could  never  be  made  to  blend  with 
it.  In  the  latter  part  of  this  verse,  the 
original  word  for  'piartly'  is  not  the  same 
in  each  clause.  In  the  former  it  is 
n>"P""jn  —  properly /)'o»»  the  end,  8C.  of 


150 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  60S 


43  And  whereas  thou  sawest  iron 
mixed  Tvith  miry  clay,  they  shall 
Diinglo  themselves  Avith  the  seed  of 

the  kingdom.  Comp.  Dan.  iv.  SI,  "  At 
the  end  of  the  days  ;"  i.  15,  "At  the  end  of 
ten  da3-s;"  and  vs.  5,  18.  Tho  word 
might  be  employed  to  denote  the  end  or 
extremity  of  anything,  e.  g.  in  respect  to 
time,  and  some  have  supposed  that  there 
is  a  reference  here  to  the  later  periods  of 
the  Roman  empire.  See  Pool's  Sj'nopsis. 
But  the  word  is  also  used  to  denote  the 
sum,  or  the  whole  numler,  and  then  the 
phrase  is  equivalent  to  a  part — as  e.  g.  in 
the  phrase  Diri'?sri  n>3  ■'l^p  PXfpn ,  from  the 
sum  of  the  vessels  of  the  house  of  God 
(Dan.  i.  2) ;  that  is,  a  portion  of  the  whole 
number,  or  a  part.  Comp.  Neh.  vii.  70, 
'  from  the  sum  of  the  heads  of  the  fathers ;' 
that  is,  a  part  of  them.  lu  the  latter  part 
of  the  clause  it  is,  ^}'!?—from.  it;  that  is,  a 
part  of  it;  partly.  The  entire  phrase 
means  that  one  part  of  the  whole  would 
be  strong;  and  one  part  would  be  fragile. 
The  reference  is  not  to  the  i; me  when  this 
would  occur,  but  to  the /ac<  that  it  would 
be.  so.  The  idea  in  this  verse  does  not 
vary  materially  from  that  in  the  former, 
except  that  in  that,  the  prominent  thought 
is,  that  there  would  be  strength  in  the 
kingdom ;  in  this,  the  idea  is,  that  while 
there  would  be  strength  in  the  kingdom, 
there  would  be  also  the  elements  of  weak- 
ness. 

43.  And  whereas  thousaxcest  iron  mixed 
with  clay,  they  shall  mingle  themselves  with 
the  seed  of  men.  Various  explanations 
have  been  given  of  this  verse,  and  it 
certainly  is  not  of  easy  interpretation. 
The  phrase  'seed  of  men'  would  properly 
denote  something  different  from  the  ori- 
ginal stock  that  was  represented  by  iron  ; 
Bome  foreign  admixture  that  would  be  so 
unlike  that,  and  that  would  so  little  amal- 
gamate with  it,  as  to  be  properly  repre- 
sented by  clay  as  compared  with  iron. 
Prof.  Stuart  interprets  this  of  matrimo- 
nial alliances,  and  supposes  that  the  idea 
expressed  is,  that,  "while  the  object  of 
Euch  alliances  was  union,  or  at  least  a 
design  to  bring  about  a  peaceable  state  of 
things,  that  object  was,  in  a  peculiar 
manner,  defeated."  The  word  rendered 
men — ><p"Jt< — is  employed,  in  Hebrew  and 
in  Chaldee,  to  denote  men  of  an  inferior 
cia.=3  —  the  lower  orders,  the  common 
herd, — in  contradistinction  from  the  more 


men :  but  they  shall  not  cleave  »  one 
to  another,  even  as  iron  is  not  mixed 
with  clay.  a  This  tvHh  this. 

elevated  and  noble  classes,  represented  by 
the  word  '^'^ii .     See  Isa,  ii.  9,  v.  15  ;  Prov. 
viii.  4.     The  word  here  used,  also  (from 
'^'1^ ,  to  be  sick,  ill  at  ease,  incurable), 
would  properly  denote  feebleness,  cr  infe- 
riority, and  would  be  aptly  represented  by 
clay  as   contrasted  with   iron.     The  ex- 
pression   '  seed   of   men'   as    here   iisedy 
would  therefore  denote  some  interming- 
ling of  an   inferior  race  with  the  original 
stock;  some  union,  or  alliance,  under  the 
one    sovereignty,    which   would    greatly 
weaken  it  as  a  whole,  though  the  original 
strength  still  was   great.     The  language 
would  represent  a  race  of  mighty  and 
powerful  men,  constituting  the  stamina — 
the  bone  and  the  sinew  of  the  empire — 
mixed   up   with   another  race,   or   other 
races,  with  whom,  though  they  were  asso- 
ciated   in    the    government,   they   could 
never  be  blended  ;  could  never  assimilate. 
This  foreign   admixture    in    the    empire 
would  be  a  constant  source  of  weakness, 
and   would   constantly  tend   to    division 
and    faction,    for    such    elements    could 
never   harmonize.      It  is   further  to   be 
remarked  that  this  would  exist  to  a  degree 
which  would  not  be  found  in  either  of  tho 
three   previous  kingdoms.      In    fact,   in 
these  kingdoms  there  was  no  such  inter- 
mingling   with    foreign    nations    as    to 
destroy  the  homogeneousness  of  the  em- 
pire.    They  were,  in  the  main.  Orientals; 
with    the    language,    the    manners,   the 
customs,  the  habits  of  Orientals,  and  in 
respect  to  energy  and  power — the  point 
here  under  consideration  —  there  was  no 
marked  distinction  between  the  subjected 
provinces  and  the   original  materials  of 
the  monarchy.     By  the  act  of  subjection, 
they  became  substantially  one  people,  and 
readily  blended  together.      This  remark 
will  certainly   apply  to  tho  two  first  of 
these  monarchies  —  the  Babylonian  and 
the  Medo-Persian ;  and  though  with  less 
force  to  the  Macedonian,  yet  it  was  not 
true  of  that  that  it  became  so  intermingled 
with  foreign  people  as  to  constitute  hete- 
rogeneous elements  as  it  was  of  the  Ro- 
man.    In  that  monarch}',  the  element  of 
strength  was  infused   by  Alexander   and 
his  Greeks ;  all  the  elements  of  weakness 
were  in   the   original    materials   of   tho 
empire.     In  the  Roman,  the  element  of 


B.  C.  603.] 


CHAPTER   11. 


151 


strength — the  iron — was  in  the  original 
material  of  the  empire;  the  weak,  the 
heterogeneous  element  —  the  clay  —  was 
that  whieh  was  introduced  from  the 
foreign  nations.  This  consideration  may 
perhaps  do  something  to  show  that  the 
opinion  of  Grotius,  Prof.  Stuart,  and 
others,  that  this  fourth  monarchy  was  that 
which  immediately  succeeded  Alexander, 
is  not  well  founded.  The  only  question 
then  is,  whether  in  the  constitution  of 
the  Roman  empire,  at  the  time  when  it 
became  the  successor  of  the  other  three  as 
a  universal  monarcliy,  there  was  such  an 
intermingling  of  a  foreign  clement,  as  to 
be  properly  represented  by  clay .  as  con- 
ti-asted  with  the  original  and  stronger 
material,  iron.  I  say,  '  at  the  time  when 
it  became  the  successor  of  the  other  three 
as  a  universal  monarchy,'  because  the 
only  point  of  view  in  which  Daniel  con- 
templated it  was  that.  He  looked  at  this, 
as  he  did  at  the  others,  as  already  such  a 
universal  dominion,  and  not  at  what  it 
was  before,  or  at  the  steps  by  which  it 
rose  to  power.  Now,  on  looking  at  the 
Roman  empire  at  that  period,  and  during 
the  time  when  it  occupied  the  position  of 
the  universal  monarchy,  and  during  which 
the  'stone  cut  out  of  the  mountain'  grew 
and  filled  the  world,  there  is  no  difficulty 
in  finding  such  an  intermingling  with 
other  nations — '  the  seed  of  men' — as  to 
be  properly  described  by  *  iron  and  clay' 
in  the  same  image  that  could  never  be 
blended.  The  allusion  is,  probably,  to 
that  intermingling  with  other  nations 
which  so  remarkably  characterised  the 
Roman  empire,  and  which  arose  partly 
from  its  conquests,  and  partly  from  the 
inroads  of  other  people  in  the  latter  days 
of  the  empire,  and  in  reference  to  both  of 
which  there  was  no  proj)er  amalgamation, 
leaving  the  original  vigour  of  the  empire 
substantially  in  its  strength,  but  intro- 
ducing other  elements  which  never  amal- 
gamated with  it,  and  which  were  like 
clay  intei-mingled  with  iron.  (1.)  From 
their  conquests.  Tacitus  says,  "  Domi- 
uandi  cupido  cunctis  affectibus  jlar/raiitior 
est"  —  the  lust  of  ruling  is  more  ardent 
than  all  other  desires, — and  this  was 
eminently  true  of  the  Romans.  They 
aspired  at  the  dominion  of  the  world  ;  and, 
in  their  strides  at  universal  conquest,  they 
brought  nations  under  their  subjection, 
and  iidmitted  them  to  the  rights  of  citizen- 
Bhipj  which  had  no  affinity  with  the 
original   material    which    composed   the 


Roman  powor,  and  which  never  really 
amalgamated  with  it,  any  more  than  clay 
does  with  iron.  (2.)  This  was  true,  also, 
in  respect  to  the  hordes  that  poured  into 
the  empire  from  other  countries,  and  par- 
ticularly from  the  Scandinavian  regiona, 
in  the  latter  periods  of  the  empire,  and 
with  which  the  Romans  were  compelled 
to  form  alliances,  while,  at  the  same  time, 
they  could  not  amalgamate  with  them. 
"  lu  the  reign  of  the  Emperor  Caracalla," 
says  Mr.  Gibbon,  "  an  innumerable 
sv/arm  of  Suevi  appeared  on  the  banks 
of  the  Mein,  and  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
the  Roman  provinces,  in  quest  of  food,  or 
plunder,  or  gkry.  The  hasty  army  of 
volunteers  gradually  coalesced  into  a 
great  and  permanent  nation,  and,  as  it 
was  composed  of  so  many  diS'erent  tribes, 
assumed  the  name  of  Allemanni,  or  all- 
men,  to  denote  their  various  lineage,  and 
their  common  bravery."  No  reader  of 
the  Roman  historj'  can  be  ignorant  of  the 
invasions  of  the  Goths,  the  Iluns,  and 
the  Vandals,  or  of  the  eifects  of  these  in- 
vasions on  the  empire.  No  one  can  be 
ignorant  of  the  m.anner  in  which  they  be- 
came intermingled  with  the  ancient  Ro- 
man people,  or  of  the  attempts  to  form 
alliances  with  them,  by  intermarriages 
and  otherwise,  which  were  alwa}-s  like 
attempts  to  unite  iron  and  clay.  "  Placidia, 
daughter  of  Theodosius  the  Great,  was 
given  in  marriage  to  Adolphus,  king  of 
the  Goths  ;  the  two  daughters  of  Stilicho, 
the  Vandal,  were  successively  married  to 
Honorius  ;  and  Genseric,  another  Vandal, 
gave  Eudocia,  a  captive  imperial  prin- 
cess, to  his  son  to  wife."  The  eifects 
of  the  intermingling  of  foreign  people 
on  the  character  and  destiny  of  the  em- 
pire, cannot  be  stated  perhaps  in  a  more 
graphic  manner  than  is  done  by  Mr. 
Gibbon,  in  the  summary  review  of  the 
Roman  History,  with  which  he  concludes 
his  seventh  chapter,  and  at  the  same 
time  there  could  scarcely  be  a  more  clear 
or  expressive  commentary  on  this  pro- 
phecy of  Daniel.  "  During  the  four  first 
ages,"  says  he,  "  the  Romans,  in  the  labo- 
rious school  of  poverty,  had  acquired  the 
virtues  of  war  and  government :  by  the 
vigorous  exertion  of  those  virtues,  and 
by  the  assistance  of  fortune,  they  had  ob- 
tained, in  the  course  of  the  three  succeed- 
ing centuries,  an  absolute  empire  over 
many  countries  of  Europe,  Asia,  and 
Africa.  The  last  three  hundred  years  had 
been  consumed  in  apparent   prosperity 


152 


DANIEL. 


[B.C.  G03. 


md  internal  decline.  The  nation  of  sol- 
diers, magistrates,  and  legislators,  who 
composed  the  thirty-five  tribes  of  the  Ro- 
man people  was  dissolved  into  the  com- 
mon mass  of  mankind,  and  confounded 
vrith  the  millions  of  servile  provincials, 
who  had  received  the  name,  without 
adopting  the  spirit,  of  Romans.  A  mer- 
cenary army,  lovied  amoEg  the  subjects 
and  barbarians  of  the  frontier,  was  the 
only  order  of  men  who  preserved  and 
abused  their  independence.  By  their 
tumultuary  election,  a  Sj'rian,  a  Goth,  or 
an  Arab,  was  exalted  to  the  throne  of 
Rome,  and  invested  with  despotic  power 
over  the  conquests  and  over  the  country 
of  the  Scipios.  The  limits  of  the  Roman 
empire  still  extended  from  the  Western 
Ocean  to  the  Tigris,  and  from  Mount 
Atlas  to  the  Rhine  and  the  Danube.  To 
the  undiscerning  ej-e  of  the  vulgar,  Philip 
appreared  a  monarch  no  less  powerful 
than  Hadrian  or  Augustus  had  formerly 
been.  The  form  was  still  the  same,  but 
the  animating  health  and  vigour  were  fled. 
The  industry  of  the  people  was  discou- 
raged and  exhausted  by  a  long  series  of 
oppression.  The  discipline  of  the  legions, 
which  alone,  after  the  extinction  of  every 
other  virtue,  had  propped  the  greatness 
of  the  .state,  was  corrupted  by  the  am- 
bition, or  relaxed  by  the  weakness  of  the 
emperors.  The  strength  of  the  frontiers, 
which  had  alw.ays  consisted  in  arms 
rather  than  in  fortifications,  was  insen- 
sibly undermined ;  and  the  fairest  pro- 
vinces were  left  exposed  to  the  rapacious- 
ness  cr  ambition  of  the  barbarians,  who 
soon  discovered  the  decline  of  the  Roman 
empire."  Vol.  i.  pp.  110,  111.  Harper's 
Edi.  N.  Y.  1829.  Comp.  Notes  on  Rev.  vi. 
1-8.  The  agency  of  the  Roman  empire 
was  so  important  in  preparing  the  world 
for  the  advent  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  in 
reference  to  the  establishment  of  his  king- 
dom, that  there  was  au  obvious  proprietj' 
that  it  should  be  made  a  distinct  subject 
of  prophecy.  We  have  seen  that  each  of 
the  other  throe  kingdoms  had  an  im- 
portant influence  in  preparing  the  world 
for  the  introduction  of  Christianity,  and 
was  designed  to  accomplish  an  important 
part  in  the  "  History  of  Redemption." 
The  agency  of  the  Roman  empire  was 
jnoro  direct  and  important  than  any  one 
or  .all  of  these ;  for  (a)  that  was  the  em- 
pire which  had  the  supremacy  when  the 
Bon  of  God  appeared ;  (i)  that  kingdom 
bad  performed  a    more  direct  and  im- 


portant work  in  preparing  the  world  foi 
his  coming;  [c)  it  was  under  authority 
derived  from  that  sovereigutj'  that  the 
Son  of  God  was  put  to  death ;  and  (</)  iV 
was  by  that  that  the  ancient  dispensation 
was  brought  to  an  end ;  and  (e)  it  was 
under  that  that  the  new  religion  waa 
spread  through  the  world.  It  may  be  of 
use,  therefore,  in  an  exposition  of  this 
prophecy,  to  refer  with  some  particularity 
to  the  things  that  were  accomplished  by 
this  'fourth  kingdom' in  furthering  the 
work  of  redemption,  or  in  introducing 
and  establishing  the  kingdom  that  was 
to  bo  'set  up,  and  which  was  never  to  be 
destroyed.'  That  agency  related  to  the 
following  points:  (1.)  Tine  establishment 
of  a  universal  dominion  ;  the  fact  that  the 
world  was  brought  under  one  sceptre, 
greatly  favoured  the  propagation  of  the 
Christian  religion.  We  have  seen,  under 
the  previous  dynasties — the  Babylonian, 
Persian,  and  Macedonian, — that  such  an 
universal  empire  was  important  in  earlier 
ages  to  prc]Hire  the  world  for  the  advent 
of  the  Messiah.  This  was  still  more  im- 
portant when  he  was  about  actually  to 
appear,  and  his  religion  was  to  be  spread 
over  the  world.  It  greatly  favoured  the 
diffusion  of  the  new  system  that  there  was 
one  empire ;  that  the  means  of  commu- 
nication from  one  part  of  the  world  to 
another  had  been  so  extended  by  the 
Romans;  and  that  one  who  was  entitled 
to  the  privileges  of  citizenship  could 
claim  protection  in  nearly  every  part  of 
the  world.  (2.)  The  prevalence  of  uni- 
versal peace.  The  world  had  become 
subject  to  the  Roman  power,  and  con- 
quest was  at  an  end.  The  world  at  last, 
after  so  long  agitations  and  strifes,  was  at 
peace.  The  distant  provinces  quietly 
submitted  to  the  Roman  control ;  the  civil 
dissensions  which  had  reigned  so  long  at 
the  capital,  were  hushed;  Augustus,  hav- 
ing triumphed  over  all  his  rivals  quietly 
occupied  the  imperial  throne,  and,  as  a 
sj'mbol  of  the  universal  peace,  the  temple 
of  Janus  was  closed.  Rarely  in  their  his- 
tory had  that  temple  been  closed  before  ;* 
and  yet  tliere  was  an  obvious  propriety 

*  This  teniple  was  built,  or  finished  at.  least, 
by  Numa.  It  was  closed,  first,  iu  his  rci}ni> 
secondly,  at  the  close  of  the  first  Punic  war, 
B.  C.  241 :  three  times  in  the  rei^irn  of  Augustus 
the  last  time  near  the  epoch  of  the  birth  of  the 
Saviour;  and  three  times  afterwards,  once 
under  Nero,  once  under  Vespasian,  and  onc« 
under  Constantius,  A.  D.  350.  Eschenbur| 
Class.  Lit.  p.  18. 


B.  C.  603.] 


CHAPTER   II. 


153 


that  when  tho  '  Prince  of  Peace'  should 
come,  the   world  should  be  at  rest,  and 
that  the  clanijnr  of  arms  should  cease.     It 
was  a  beautiful  emblem  of  the  nature  of 
his  rcii^n.     A  world  that  had  been  alwaj-s 
in  conflict  before  rested  on  its  arms;   the 
tumult  of  battle  had  died  away;  the  ban- 
ners of  war  were  furled;   the  legions  of 
Rome  paused  in  their  career  of  conquest, 
and  tho  world  tranquilly  waited  for  the 
coming  of  the  Son  of  God.     (3.)  The  llo- 
man  power  accomplished    an   important 
agency  in  the  great  transaction  which  the 
Son    of    God    came    to    perform    in    his 
making  an  atonement  for  the  sins  of  the 
world.     It  was  so  arranged,  in  the  divine 
counsels,  that  he  should  be  put  to  death, 
not  by  the  hands  of  his  own  kindred  and 
countrymen,  but  by  the  hands  of  foreign- 
ers, and  under  their  authority-.     The  ne- 
cessity and  the  certainty  of  this  was  early 
predicted  by  the  Saviour  (Matt.  xxis.  19  ; 
Mark  x.  33 ;  Luke   xviii.  32),  and  it  is 
clear  that  there  were   important  reasons 
why  it  should  be  thus  done,  and  doubtless 
one  design  of  bringing  Judea  and  the  rest 
of  the  world  under  the  Roman  j'oke  was 
that  it  might  be  accomplished  in  this  way. 
Among  the  reasons  for  this,  may  be  sug- 
gested  such    as    the  following:    («)  The 
heathen    world,    as    well   as  the   Jewish 
community,  thus  had  a  part  in  the  great 
transaction.      He    died    for     the    whole 
■world  —  Jews  and  Gentiles  —  and  it  was 
important  that  that  fact  should  be  referred 
to  in  the  manner  of  his  death,  and  that 
the    two   great   divisions  of  the   human 
family   should    be   united   in    the    great 
transaction.     It  thus  became  not  a  Jewish 
affair  only :  not  an  event  in  which  Judea 
alone  wa3  interested,  but  an  affair  of  the 
world ;   a  transaction  in  which  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  world  took  their   part. 
(b)  It  was   thus  made  a  matter  of  pub- 
licity.    The  account  of  the  death  of  the 
Saviour  would  thus,  of  course,  be  trans- 
mitted  to    the    capital,    and  would   de- 
mand the  attention  of  those  who  were  in 
power.     When  the  gospel  was  preached 
at  Rome,  it  would  be  proper  to  allege  that 
it  was  a  thing  in  which  Rome  itself  had 
had  an  important  agencj-,  the  fact  that 
under  the  Roman  authoritj'  the  Messiah 
had  been  put  to  death,     (c)  The  agency 
of    the    Romans,    therefore,    established 
the  certainty  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  and 
consequently  the  certainty  of  his  having 
risen  from  the  dead.     In  order  to  demon- 
strate the  latter,  it  was  indispensable  that 


the  former  should  be  made  certain,  and 
that  all  questions  in  regard  to  the  realUv 
of  his  death  slioukl  be  placed  beyond  a 
doubt.  This  was  done  by  the  agency  of 
Pilate,  a  Roman  governor.  His  death 
was  certified  to  him,  and  he  was  satisfied 
of  it.  It  became  a  matter  of  record ;  a 
point  about  which  there  could  be  no  dis- 
pute. According!}-,  in  all  the  questions 
that  came  up  in  reference  to  tho  religion 
of  Christ,  it  was  never  made  a  matter  of 
doubt  that  he  had  been  really  put  to 
death  under  Pilate,  the  Roman  governor, 
whatever  question  may  have  arisen  about 
the  fact  of  his  resurrection,  (d)  Equally 
important  was  the  agency  of  the  Romans 
in  establishing  the  innocence  of  the  Sa- 
viour. After  patient  and  repeated  trials 
before  himself,  Pilate  was  constrained  to 
say  that  he  was  innocent  of  the  charges 
alleged  against  him,  and  that  no  fault 
could  be  found  in  him.  In  proclaiming 
the  gospel,  it  was  of  immense  importance 
to  be  able  to  affirm  this  througiioat  tho 
world.  It  could  never  be  alleged  against 
the  gospel  that  its  author  had  violated 
the  laws;  that  he  desei-ved  to  be  put  to 
death  as  a  malefactor,  for  the  records  of 
the  Roman  governor  himself  showed  the 
contrary.  The  agency  of  the  Romans, 
therefore,  in  the  great  work  of  the  atone- 
ment, though  undesigned  on  their  part, 
was  of  inestimable  importance  in  the 
establishment  of  the  Christian  religion ; 
and  it  may  be  presumed  that  it  was  for 
this,  in  part  at  least,  that  the  world  was 
placed  under  their  control,  and  that  it 
was  so  ordered  that  the  Messiah  suffered 
under  authority  derived  from  them. 
(4.)  There  was  another  important  agency 
of  the  Romans  in  reference  to  the  religion 
that  was  to  fill  the  earth.  It  was  in 
destroj'ing  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  and 
bringing  to  a  final  end  the  whole  sj-stem 
of  Hebrew  rites  and  ceremonies.  The 
ancient  sacrifices  lost  their  efficacy  really 
when  the  atonement  was  made  on  the 
cross.  Then  there  was  no  need  of  the 
temple  and  the  altar,  and  the  ancient 
priesthood.  It  was  necessary  that  the 
ancient  rites  should  cease,  and,  that 
having  now  lost  their  efficacy,  there 
should  be  no  possibility  of  perpetuating 
them.  Accordingly,  within  the  space  of 
about  thirty  3-ears  after  the  death  of  the 
Saviour,  when  there  had  been  time  to 
perceive  the  bearing  of  the  atonement 
made  on  their  temple  rites ;  when  it  was 
plain  that  they  were  no  longer  efficacious. 


154 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  6Ja 


44  And   in   =■,  the   days   of  these 
kings  shall  the  God  ''  of  heaven  set 

a  TJieir.  b  Micali  4.  7  ;  Luke  1.  32,  33. 


significant,  or  necessary,  the  Romans 
were  suffered  to  destroy  the  city,  the 
altar,  and  the  temrjle,  and  to  bring  the 
whole  system  to  a  perpetual  end.  The 
place  where  the  ancient  worship  had 
been  celebrated  was  made  a  heap  of 
rains ;  the  altar  was  overturned,  never  to 
be  built  again;  and  the  pomp  and 
splendor  of  the  ancient  ritual  passed 
away  for  ever.  It  was  the  design  of  God 
that  that  system  should  come  to  a  per- 
petual end;  and  hence,  by  his  provi- 
dence, it  was  so  arranged  that  ruin  should 
spread  over  the  city  where  the  Lord  was 
crucified,  and  that  the  Jewish  people 
should  never  build  an  altar  or  a  temple 
there  again.  To  this  day  it  has  never 
been  in  their  power  to  kindle  the  fire  of 
sacrifice  there,  or  to  cause  the  smoke  of 
incense  to  ascend  in  a  temple  consecrated 
to  the  worship  of  the  God  of  their  fathers. 
The  agency  of  this  fourth  kingdom, 
therefore,  was  exceedingly  important  in 
the  introduction  and  establishment  of  that 
kingdom  which  was  to  be  perpetual,  and 
which  was  to  fill  the  earth,  and  hence  the 
reference  to  it  here,  and  the  more  ex- 
tended reference  in  ch.  vii. 

44.  And  in  the  days  of  tJicse  Jcinr/s. 
Marg.  their.  The  reading  in  the  text — 
'  these  kings' — is  the  more  correct.  The 
Vulgate  renders  this,  '  in  the  days  of 
these  kingdoms.'  The  natural  and  ob- 
vious sense  of  the  passage  is,  that  during 
the  continuance  of  the  kingdoms  above 
mentioned,  or  before  they  should  finally 
pass  away,  that  is,  before  the  last  one 
should  become  extinct,  another  kingdom 
would  be  established  on  the  earth  which 
which  would  be  perpetual.  Before  the 
succession  of  universal  monarchies  should 
have  passed  away,  the  new  kingdom 
would  be  set  up  that  would  never  be 
destroyed.  Such  language  is  not  uncom- 
mon. "  Thus,  if  we  were  to  speak  of  any- 
thing taking  place  in  the  days  of  British 
kings,  we  should  not  of  course  understand 
it  as  running  through  all  their  reigns,  but 
merely  as  occurring  in  some  one  of  them." 
Prof.  Bush.  So  it  is  said  in  Ruth  i.  1 : 
"  It  came  to  pass  in  the  days  when  the 
judges  ruled,  that  there  was  a  famine  in 
the  land ;"  that  is,  the  famine  occurred 
Bometime  under  that  general  administra- 
Uon,  or  before  it  had  passed  away,  evi- 


up  a  kingdom  which  shall  never  hi 
destroyed :  and  the  '  kingdom  shali 

^  Kingdom  Vutroof. 


dently  not  meaning  that  there  was  a 
famine  in  the  reign  of  each  one.  So  it  is 
said  of  Jephtha,  that  he  was  buried  in  the 
cities  of  Gilead  ;  that  is,  some  one  of  them. 
Josiah  was  buried  in  the  sepulchres  of  hit 
fathers;  that  is,  in  some  one  of  them. 
^  Shall  the  God  of  heaven.  The  God  who 
rules  in  heaven;  the  true  God.  This  is 
designed  to  show  the  divino  origin  of  this 
kingdom,  and  to  distinguish  it  from 
all  others.  Though  the  others  here  re- 
ferred to  were  under  the  divine  control, 
and  were  designed  to  act  an  important 
part  in  preparing  the  world  for  this,  3'et 
they  are  not  represented  as  deriving  their 
origin  directly  from  heaven.  They  were 
founded  in  the  usual  manner  of  earthly 
monarchies,  but  this  was  to  hnve  a  hea- 
venly origin.  In  accordance  with  this, 
the  kingdom  which  the  Meajiah  came 
to  establish  is  often  called  in  the  New 
Testament,  'the  kingdom  of  heaven,' 
'  the  kingdom  of  God,'  &c.  Comp.  Micah 
iv.  7 ;  Luke  i.  32,  33.  •[  Set  vp  a  king- 
dom. '  Shall  cause  to  arise  or  stand  up' — 
D'')?'! .  It  shall  not  owe  its  origin  to  the 
usual  causes  by  which  empires  are  consti- 
tuted on  the  earth  —  by  conquests  ;  by 
human  policy ;  by  powerful  alliances ;  by 
transmitted  hereditary  possessions,  but 
shall  exist  because  God  shall  appoint  and 
constitute  it.  There  can  be  no  reasonable 
doubt  as  to  what  kingdom  is  here  in- 
tended, and  nearly  all  expositors  have 
supposed  that  it  refers  to  the  kingdom  of 
tlie  Jlessiah.  Grotius,  indeed,  who  made 
the  fourth  kingdom  refer  to  the  Seleucida9 
and  Lagida;,  was  constrained  by  consis- 
tency to  make  this  refer  to  the  Roman 
power ;  but  in  this  interpretation  he 
stands  almost,  if  not  entirely  alone.  Yet 
even  he  supposes  it  to  refer  not  to  heathen 
Rome  only,  but  to  Rome  as  the  perpetual 
seat  of  power — the  permanent  kingdom — 
the  seat  of  the  church  :  Imperium  Roma- 
num  perpetuo  mansurum,  quod  sedes  erit 
ecclesi».  And  although  he  maintain? 
that  it  refers  to  Rome  primarily,  yet  he  ia 
constrained  to  acknowledge  tliat  what  is 
here  said  is  true  in  a  higher  sense  of 
the  kingdom  of  Christ:  Sensu?  sublimin, 
Christum  finem  impositurum  omnibus  im- 
perils terrestribus.  But  there  can  be  no 
real    doubt   as  to  what   kingdom  is  in. 


B.  C.  603.] 


CHAPTER  II. 


M 


not  be  left  to  other  people,  but  it  I  all   these    kingdoms,    and    it  thaU 
shall  break  =^  in  pieces  and  consume     stand  for  ever,  a  Pg_  2.9. 

the  mountains  without  hands,  impinging 
on  the  image.     See  Notes  on  vs.  34,  35. 

Two  inquiries  at  once  meet  us  here, 
of  somewliat  difficult  solution.  The  first 
is,  how,  if  this  is  designed  to  apply  to 
the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah,  can  the 
description  be  true  ?  The  language  hero 
would  seem  to  imply  some  violent  action  ; 
some  positive  crushing  force;  something 
like  that  which  occurs  in  conquests  when 
nations  are  subdued.  Would  it  not  ap- 
pear from  this  that  the  kingdom  here 
represented  was  to  make  its  way  by  con- 
quests in  the  same  manner  as  the  other 
kingdoms,  rather  than  by  a  silent  and 
peaceful  influence  ?  Is  this  language,  in 
tact,  applicable  to  the  method  in  which 
the  kingdom  of  Christ  is  to  supplant  all 
others?  In  reply  to  these  questions,  it 
may  be  remarked,  (1.)  That  the  leading 
idea,  as  apparent  in  the  prophecy,  is  not 
so  much  that  o(  violence  as  that  the  king- 
doms referred  to  would  be  bitterly  broxirjht 
to  an  end  ;  that  there  would  be,  under  this 
new  kingdom,  ultimately  an  entire  cessa- 
tion of  the  others  ;  or  that  they  would  be 
removed  or  supplanted  by  this.  This  is 
represented  (ver.  35)  by  the  fact  that  the 
materials  composing  the  other  kingdoms 
are  represented  before  this  as  becoming 
like  "  the  chaff  in  the  summer  threshing- 
floors;"  and  as  "  being  carried  away, 
so  that  no  place  was  found  for  them." 
The  stone  cut  out  of  the  mountain, 
small  at  first,  was  mysteriously  en- 
larged, so  that  it  occupied  the  place  which 
they  did,  and  ultimately  filled  the  earth. 
A  process  of  gradual  demolition,  acting 
on  them  by  constant  attrition,  removing 
portions  of  them,  and  occupying  their 
place  unHl  they  should  disappear,  and 
until  there  should  be  a  complete  substitu- 
tion of  the  new  kingdom  in  their  place, 
would  seem  to  correspond  with  all  that  is 
essential  in  the  prophetic  description. 
See  Notes  on  ver.  34,  on  the  expression, 
"which  emote  the  image  upon  his  feet." 
But  (2.)  this  language  is  in  accordance 
with  that  which  is  commonly  used  in  the 
predictions  respecting  the  kingdom  of  the 
Messiah — language  which  is  descriptive 
of  the  existence  of  poiver  in  subduing  the 
nations,  and  bringing  the  opposing  king- 
doms of  the  world  to  an  end.  Thus  ijj 
Psilm  ii.  9,  ''  Thou  shalt  break  them  with 
a  I'od  of  iron ;   thou  shalt  dash  them  ia 


tended.  Its  distinctly  declared  divine 
origin  ;  the  declaration  that  i*.  shall  never 
be  destroyed;  the  assurance  that  it  would 
absorb  all  other  kingdoms,  and  that  it 
would  stand  lev  ever  ;  and  the  entire  ac- 
cordance of  these  declarations  with  the 
account  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah  in 
the  New  Testament,  show  beyond  a  doubt 
that  the  kingdom  of  the  Redeemer  is 
intended.  ^  Which  shall  never  be  destroy- 
ed. The  others  would  pass  away.  The 
Babylonian  would  be  succeeded  by  the 
Medo-Persian,  that  by  the  Macedonian, 
that  by  the  lloman,  and  that  in  its  turn 
by  the  one  which  the  God  of  heaven 
would  set  up.  This  would  be  perpetual. 
Nothing  would  have  power  to  overthrow 
it.  It  would  live  in  the  revolutions  of 
all  other  kingdoms,  and  would  survive 
them  all.  Comp.  Notes  on  ch.  vii.  14; 
and  the  summary  of  the  doctrines  taught 
here  at  the  close  of  the  Notes  on  ver  45. 
^  And  the  kinr/dom  shall  not  be  left  to 
other  j)cople.  Marg.  their.  Literally, 
'  Its  kingdom  shall  not  be  left  to  other 
people  ;'  that  is,  the  ruling  power  appro- 
priate to  this  kingdom  or  dominion  shall 
never  pass  away  from  its  rightful  pos- 
sessor, and  be  transferred  to  other  hands. 
In  respect  to  other  kingdoms,  it  often 
happens  that  their  sovereigns  are  deposed, 
and  that  their  power  passes  into  the 
hands  of  usurpers.  But  this  can  never 
occur  in  this  kingdom.  The  government 
will  never  change  hands.  The  adminis- 
tration will  be  perpetual.  No  foreign 
power  shall  sway  the  sceptre  of  this  king- 
dom. There  may  be  an  allusion  here  to 
the  fact  that,  in  respect  to  each  of  the 
other  kingdoms  mentioned,  the  power 
over  the  same  territory  did  pass  into  the 
hands  of  other  people.  Thus,  on  the 
same  territory,  the  dominion  passed  from 
the  hands  of  the  Babylonian  princes  to 
the  hands  of  Cyrus  the  Persian,  and  then 
to  the  hands  of  Alexander  the  Macedonian, 
and  then  to  the  hands  of  the  Romans. 
But  this  would  never  occur  in  regard  to 
the  kingdom  which  the  God  of  heaven 
would  set  up.  In  the  region  of  empire 
appropriate  to  it,  it  would  never  change 
hands;  and  this  promise  of  perpetuity 
made  this  kingdom  wholly  unlike  all  its 
predecessors.  ^  But  it  shall  break  in 
pieces  and  consume  all  these  kingdoms. 
As  represented  by  the  stone  cut  out  of 


156 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  6oa. 


'jiieces  like  a  potter's  vessel."  Isa.  Ix.  12, 
"  For  the  nation  ami  kingdom  that  will 
not  serve  thee  shall  perish;  yea,  those 
nations  shall  be  utterlj'  wasted."  So  1  Cor. 
XV.  24,  25,  "  When  he  shall  have  put  down 
all  rule,  and  all  authoritj',  and  power. 
For  ho  must  reign  till  he  hath  put  all 
enemies  under  his  feet."  These  expres- 
sions denote  that  there  will  be  an  entire 
subjection  of  other  kingdoms  to  that  of 
the  Messiah,  called  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, "  the  kingdom  of  God."  They  un- 
doubtedly imply  that  there  will  be  some 
kind  of /orcc  employed  —  for  this  great 
TTork  cannot  be  accomplished  without 
the  existence  of  poicer ;  but  it  may  be 
remarked  (a)  that  it  does  not  necessarily 
mean  that  there  will  be  phj/sical  force,  or 
power  like  that  by  which  kingdoms  have 
been  usually  overturned.  The  kingdom 
of  the  Redeemer  is  a  kingdom  of  priii- 
ciples,  and  those  principles  will  subdue 
the  nations,  and  bring  them  into  subjec- 
tion, (t)  It  does  not  necessarily  mean 
that  the  efi'ect  here  described  will  be  ac- 
complished at  once.  It  may  be  by  a 
gradual  process,  like  a  continual  beating 
on  the  image,  reducing  it  ultimately  to 
powder. 

The  other  question  which  arises  here 
is,  IIow  can  it  be  said  that  the  new  king- 
dom which  was  to  be  setup  would  "break 
in  pieces  and  consume  all  these  king- 
doms ?"  How  could  the  destruction  of 
the  image  in  the  Roman  period  be  in  fact 
the  destruction  of  the  three  previous  king- 
doms, represented  by  gold,  and  silver,  and 
brass  ?  Would  they  not  in  fact  have 
passed  away  before  the  Roman  power 
came  into  existence  ?  And  yet,  is  not 
the  representation  in  ver.  35,  that  the 
iron,  the  clay,  the  brass,  the  silver,  and 
the  gold  were  broken  in  pieces  together, 
and  were  all  scattered  like  the  chaff  of 
the  summer  threshing-floor?  Is  it  sup- 
posed that  these  kingdoms  would  be  all 
in  existence  at  the  same  time,  and  that 
the  action  of  the  symbolical  '  stone'  was 
to  be  alike  on  all  of  them?  To  these 
questions,  we  may  answer,  (1.)  That  the 
meaning  is,  undoubtedly,  that  three  of 
these  kingdoms  would  have  passed  away 
at  the  time  of  the  action  of  the  '  stone' 
referred  to.  They  were  to  be  a  succession 
of  kingdoms,  occupying  to  a  great  extent, 
the  same  territory,  and  not  contemporary 
monarchies  occupying  distinct  territories. 
(2.)  The  action  of  the  '  stone'  was  in  faet, 
d  a  most  important  sense,  to  be  on  theu 


all ;  that  is,  it  was  to  be  on  what  coDstu 
tilted  these  successive  kingdoms  of  gold, 
silver,  brass,  and  iron.     Each  was  in  ita 
turn  a  universal  monarchy.      The  same 
territory  was  substantially    occupied   by 
them  all.     The  Medo-Pcrsian  sceptre  ex- 
tended over  the  region  under  the  Baby- 
lonian ;  the    Jlacedonian    over  that ;  the 
Roman   over  that.     These   were    indeed 
accessions  in  each  successive  monarchy, 
but  still  any  thing  which  affected  the  Ro- 
man   empire   affected   what   had  in  fad 
been  the  Babj'lonian,  the  Medo-Persian, 
and  the   Macedonian.     A  demolition  of 
the  image  in  the  time  of  the  Roman  em- 
pire would  be,  therefore,  in  fact,   a  de- 
molition of  the  whole.     (3.)  This  inter- 
pretation is  necessary  from  the  nature  of 
the  sj-mbolicU  representation.     The  eye 
of  the  monarch  in  the  dream  was  directed 
to  the  image  as  n  splendid  uliole.     Itwaa 
necessary  to  the  object  in  view  that  he 
should  see  it  cdl  at  a  time,  that  he  might 
have   a  distinct  conception    of  it.     This 
purpose  made  it  impossible  to  exhibit  the 
kingdoms  j'«  succession,  hut  they  all  stood 
up  before  him  at  once.     No  one  can  doubt 
that   there    might  have  been  a  different 
representation,   and    that   the   kingdoms 
might  have  been  made  to  pass  before  him 
in    their   order,    but    the   representation 
would  have  been  less  grand  and  impos- 
ing.    But  this  design  made  it  necessary 
that  the  image  should  be  kept  entire  be- 
fore  the   mind   until  its  demolition.     It 
would  have  been  unseemly  to  have  re- 
presented the  head  as  removei,  and  then 
the  shoulders  and  breast,  an  I  then  the 
belly  and  thighs,  until  nothing   remained 
but  the  feet  and  toes.     It  was  necessary 
to  keep  up  the  representation  of  the  imar/e 
of    colossal   majesty  and  strength,  until  a 
new  power  should  arise  which  icould  de- 
molish it  all.     Nebuchadnezzar  is  not  re- 
presented as  seeing  the  parts  of  the  imago 
successively    appear   or   disappear.      lie 
does  not  at  first  see  the  golden  head  rising 
above  the  earth  and  then  the  other  parts 
in  succession  ;  nor  the  golden  head  dis- 
appearing, and  then  the  other  parts,  until 
nothing  was  left  but  the  feet  and  the  toes. 
Such   a   representation    would   have   de- 
stroyed the  decorum  and  beauty  of  the 
whole  figure;  and  as  it  cannot  be  argued 
that  because     Nebuchadnezzar   saw    the 
whole  image  at  the  outset  standing  in  its 
complete    form    that    there/ore   all    these 
kingdoms  must  have  been  simultaneously 
in  existence,  so  it  cannot  be  argued  be- 


B.  C.  603.J 


CHAPTER   II. 


157 


45  Forasmucli  as  thou  sawestthat 
the  stono  was  cat  out  of  the  moun- 
tain ^-without  hands,  and  that  it 
brake  in  pieces  the  iron,  the  brass, 
the  cLay,  the  silver,  and  the  gold  ; 


cause  he  saw  the  whole  image  standing 
when  the  stone  smote  upon  it,  that  there- 
fore all  these  kingdoms  must  have  had 
an  existence  then.  It  may  be  added 
(4.)  that  the  destruction  of  the  last  was  in 
fact  the  destruction  of  all  the  three  pre- 
decessors. The  whole  power  had  become 
embodied  in  that,  and  the  demolition 
affected  tli^i  whole  series. 

45.  Forasmuch  as  thou  sawest  that  the 
stone,  &c.  On  the  meaning  of  the  lan- 
guage emploj'ed  here,  see  Notes  on  vs. 
34,  35.  The  word  forasmuch  may  be 
taken  either  in  connection  with  what  pre- 
cedes, or  with  what  follows.  In  the 
former  method,  there  should  be  a  period 
at  the  word  (/old  in  this  verse,  and  then 
the  sense  is,  '  In  those  days  .shall  the  God 
of  heaven  set  up  a  kingdom,  <tc.,  foras- 
much, or  because  thou  sawest  a  stone,' <tc., 
that  is,  that  was  a  certain  indication  of 
it.  According  to  the  other  method,  the 
meaning  is,  '  Forasmuch  as  thou  sawest 
the  stone  cut  out  and  demolish  the  image, 
the  great  God  has  made  known  the  cer- 
tainty of  it;'  that  is,  that  is  a  certain 
indication  that  it  will  be  done.  The  Vul- 
gate is,  'According  to  what  thou  sawest, 
that  the  stone  was  cut  out  without  hands, 
and  reduced  the  clay,  kc,  the  great  God 
has  shown  to  the  king  what  will  be  here- 
after.' The  difference  in  the  interpreta- 
tion is  not  very  material.  ^  Cut  out  of 
the  mountain.  This  is  not  inserted  in  the 
statement  in  ver.  34.  It  seems,  however, 
to  be  implied  there,  as  there  is  mention 
of  the  stone  as  '  cut  out.'  The  representa- 
tion is  evidently  that  of  a  stone  disengaged 
from  its  native  bed,  the  side  of  a  moun- 
tain, without  any  human  agency,  and 
then  rolling  down  the  side  of  it  and  im- 
pinging on  the  image.  %  The  great  God 
hath  made  known  to  the  king  lohat  shall 
come  to  pass  hereafter.  Marg.  the  same 
as  the  Chaldee,  after  this.  The  meaning 
is  simply,  iu  time  to  come ;  in  some  fu- 
ture period.  Daniel  claims  none  of  the 
merit  of  this  discovery  to  himself,  but 
ascribes  it  all  to  God.  •[  And  the  dream 
is  certain,  and  the  interpretation  thereof 
sure.  Tfiai  is,  it  is  ;ao  vain  and  airy 
phantom:  no  mere  working  jf  the  iraagi- 

U 


the  great  God  hath  made  kno-vrn  tt 
the  king  what  shall  come  to  pass 
^  liereafter :  and  the  dream  is  certain, 
and  the  interpretation  thereof  sure. 

^^  Widch  was  not  in  hands.  h  After  tins. 


nation.  The  dream  was  all  that  tha 
monarch  had  supposed  it  to  be — a  repre- 
sentation of  coming  events,  and  his  soli- 
citude in  regard  to  it  was  well-founded. 
Daniel  speaks  with  the  utmost  assurance 
also  as  to  its  fulfilment.  He  knew  that 
he  had  been  led  to  this  interpretation  by 
no  skill  of  his  own;  and  his  representa- 
tion of  it  was  such  as  to  satisfy  the  mon- 
arch of  its  correctness.  Two  circum- 
stances probably  made  it  appear  certain 
to  the  monarch,  as  we  learn  from  the  next 
verse  it  did: — one,  that  Daniel  had  re- 
called the  dream  to  his  own  recollection, 
showing  that  he  was  under  a  divine  guid- 
ance ;  and  the  other,  the  plausibility — 
the  verisimilitude — the  evident  truthful- 
ness of  the  representation.  It  was  such 
a  manifest  explanation  of  the  dream  that 
Nebuchadnezzar,  in  the  same  manner  as 
Pharaoh  had  done  before  him  whtjn  his 
dreams  were  explained  by  Joseph,  at  once 
admitted  the  correctness  of  the  represen- 
tation. 

Having  now  gone  through  with  tho 
exposition  of  this  important  passage  re- 
specting the  stone  cut  from  the  mountain, 
it  seems  proper  to  make  a  few  remarks 
in  regard  to  the  nature  of  the  kingdom 
that  would  be  set  up,  as  represented  by 
the  stone  which  demolished  the  image, 
and  which  so  marvellously  increased  as 
to  fill  the  earth.  That  there  is  reference 
to  the  kingdom  of  tho  Messiah  cannot  be 
reasonably  doubted.  The  points  which 
are  established  in  respect  to  that  kingdom 
by  the  passage  now  under  consideration, 
are  the  following  : 

I.  Its  superhuman  origin.  This  is  in- 
dicated in  the  representation  of  the  stone 
cut  out  of  the  mountain  '  without  hands  ;' 
that  is,  clearly  not  by  human  agency,  or 
in  the  ordinary  course  of  events.  There 
was  to  be  a  superhuman  power  exerted  in 
detaching  it  from  the  mountain,  as  well 
as  in  its  future  growth.  What  appeared 
so  marvellous  was,  that  it  was  cut  from 
its  original  resting-place  by  some  invisible 
power,  and  mcvcd  forward  to  the  con- 
summation of  its  work  without  any  hu- 
man agency.  That  this  was  designed  to 
be  sigaiiicant  of  something  there  can  be 


151! 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  60S 


ao  reaaonablo  doubt,  for  the  result  is 
made  to  turn  on  this.  I  do  not  see  that 
any  special  significancy  is  to  be  attached 
to  the  idea  of  its  being  cut  from  '  a  moun- 
tain,' nor  that  it  is  required  of  us  to 
attempt  to  refine  on  that  expression, 
and  to  ascertain  whether  the  mountain 
means  the  Roman  kingdom,  out  of  which 
the  gospel  church  was  taken,  as  many 
suppose ;  or  the  Jewish  nation,  as  Augus- 
tine supposed ;  or  that  "  the  origin  of 
Christ  was  sublime  and  superior  to  the 
whole  world,"  as  Calvin  supposes  ;  or  to 
the  mountainous  country  of  Judea  in 
which  the  Messiah  was  born,  as  many 
others  have  maintained;  or  to  the  tomb 
of  Joseph,  as  a  rock  from  which  the  Mes- 
siah sprang  to  life  and  victor.y,  as  others 
have  imagined.  All  this  belongs  to  a 
system  of  interpretation  that  is  trifling  in 
the  extreme.  The  representation  of  the 
mountain  here  is  merely  for  the  sake  of 
verisimilitude — like  the  circumstances  in 
a  parable.  If  a  stone  was  '  cut  out  with- 
out hands,'  it  would  be  natural  to  speak 
of  it  as  cut  from  the  mountain  or  parent 
rock  to  which  it  was  attached.  The  ej-e 
is  not  here  directed  to  the  mountain  as 
having  any  thing  significant  or  marvel- 
lous about  it,  but  to  the  stone  that  so  mys- 
teriously left  its  bed,  and  rolled  onward 
toward  the  image.  The  point  of  interest 
and  of  marvel,  the  mysterious  thing  that 
attracted  the  eye,  was  that  there  was  no 
human  agency  employed;  that  no  hands 
were  seen  at  work ;  that  none  of  the  or- 
dinary instrumentalities  were  seen  by 
•which  great  efi"ects  are  accomplished 
among  men.  Now  this  would  properly 
represent  the  idea  that  the  kingdom  of 
the  Messiah  would  have  a  supernatural 
origin.  Its  beginnings  would  be  unlike 
what  is  usually  seen  among  men.  How 
appropriately  this  applies  to  the  kingdom 
of  the  Messiah,  as  having  its  origin  not  in 
human  power,  need  not  here  be  stated. 
Nothing  is  more  apparent;  nothing  is 
more  frequently  dwelt  on  in  the  New 
Testament,  than  that  it  had  a  heavenly 
origin.  It  did  not  owe  its  beginning  to 
humaii  plans,  counsels,  or  power. 

II.  Its  feebleness  in  its  beginning  com- 
pared with  its  ultimate  growth  and  power. 
At  first  it  was  a  stone  comparatively 
small,  and  that  seemed  utterly  inadequate 
to  the  work  of  demolishing  and  pulver- 
izing a  colossal  statue  of  gold,  silver, 
brass,  and  iron.  Ultimately  it  grew  to 
'je  itself  OS.  mcvataiii-size,  and  to  fill  the 


land.  Now  this  representation  would 
undoubtedly  convey  the  fair  impression 
that  this  new  power,  represented  by  the 
stone,  would  at  first  be  comparative!." 
small  and  feeble ;  that  there  would  bu 
comparative  weakness  in  its  origin  aa 
contrasted  with  what  it  would  ultimately 
attain  to ;  and  that  it  would  seem  to  be 
utterly  inadequate  to  the  performance  of 
what  it  finally  accomplished.  It  is  hardly 
necessary  to  say  that  this  correspond.i 
entirely  with  the  origin  of  the  Messiah's 
kingdom.  Every  where  it  is  represented 
as  of  feeble  beginnings,  and  as  a  system, 
to  human  view,  entirely  inadequate  to  so 
great  <a  work  as  that  of  bringing  other 
kingdo.ms  to  an  end,  and  subduing  it  to 
itself.  The  complete  fulfilment  of  the 
prophetic  statement  would  bo  found  in 
such  circumstances  as  the  following : 
(1.)  The  humble  origin  of  the  head  of 
this  new  power  himself — the  Messiah — 
the  king  of  Zion.  He  was  in  fact  of  a 
decayed  and  dilapidated  family;  was 
ranked  among  the  poor ;  was  without 
powerful  friends  or  political  connections  ; 
possessed  no  uncommon  advantages  of 
learning,  and  was  regarded  with  contempt 
and  scorn  by  the  great  mass  of  his  coun- 
trymen. No  one  would  have  supposed 
that  the  religion  originated  by  one  of  so 
humble  an  origin  would  have  power  to 
change  the  destiny  of  the  kingdoms  of 
the  earth.  (2.)  The  feebleness  of  the 
beginning  of  his  kingdom.  His  few  fol- 
lowers ;  the  little  band  of  fishermen ; 
the  slow  progress  at  first  made — these 
were  circumstances  strikingly  in  accord- 
ance with  the  representation  in  Daniel. 
(3.)  The  absence  in  that  band  of  all  that 
seemed  requisite  to  accomplish  so  great  a 
work.  They  had  no  arms,  no  wealth,  no 
political  power.  They  had  nothing  of 
that  which  has  commonly  been  employed 
to  overthrow  kingdoms,  and  the  band 
of  fishermen  sent  forth  to  this  work 
seemed  as  little  adequate  to  the  under- 
taking as  the  stone  cut  from  the  moun- 
tain did  to  demolish  the  colossal  image. 
(4.)  All  this  feebleness  in  the  beginning 
was  wonderfully  contrasted  with  the  ulti- 
mate results — like  the  stone,  when  cut 
from  the  mountain,  contrasted  with  its 
magnitude  when  it  filled  the  earth.  The 
Saviour  himself  often  referred  to  the  con- 
trast between  the  feeble  origin  of  his  reli- 
gion, and  what  it  would  grow  to  be.  A< 
first  it  was  like  a  grain  of  mustard  seed, 
smallest  among  seeds ;  then  it  grew  to  be 


B.  C.  603. 


CHAPTER   II 


m 


s  tree  so  large  that  the  fowls  of  the  air 
lodged  in  the  branches.  At  first  it  was 
like  loavcn,  hidden  in  meal ;  ultimately, 
It  would  diliuse  itself  through  the  mass, 
80  that  the  whole  would  be  leavened. 
Matt.  xiii.  31 — 33, 

III.  It  would  supplant  all  other  king- 
doms. This  was  clearly  indicated  by  the 
fact  that  the  *  stone'  demolished  the 
image,  reducing  it  to  powder,  and  filled 
the  place  which  that  occupied,  and  all  the 
land.  This  has  been  explained  (Notes 
on  vs.  34,  35,)  as  moaning  that  it  would 
not  be  by  sudden  violence,  but  by  a  con- 
tinued process  of  comminution.  There 
would  be  such  an  action  on  the  kingdoms 
of  the  earth  represented  by  gold,  and 
silver,  and  brass,  and  iron,  that  they 
would  disappear,  and  the  new  power  re- 
presented by  the  'stone'  would  finally 
take  their  place.  As  this  new  power  was 
to  be  humble  in  its  origin,  and  feeble  to 
human  view:  as  it  had  nothing  which,  to 
outward  appearance,  would  seem  adequate 
to  the  result,  the  reference  would  seem  to 
be  to  the  ^j;-i(ici};?es  which  would  charac- 
terize it,  and  which,  as  elements  of  power, 
would  gradually  but  ultimately  secure 
the  changes  represented  by  the  demoli- 
tion of  the  colossal  statue.  The  only 
question  then  would  be,  whether  the 
principles  in  the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah 
had  such  originality  and  power  as  would 
gradually  but  certainly  change  the  modes 
of  government  that  existed  in  the  world, 
and  substitute  another  kind  of  reign;  or, 
what  is  the  influence  which  it  will  exert 
on  the  nations,  causing  new  methods  of 
government,  in  accordance  with  its  prin- 
ciples, to  prevail  on  the  earth.  Though 
apparently  feeble,  without  arms,  or  wealth, 
or  civil  alliances,  it  has  elements  of^;o!«ec 
about  it  which  will  ultimately  subdue  all 
other  principles  of  government,  and  take 
their  place.  Its  work  was  indeed  to  be  a 
gradual  work,  and  it  is  by  no  means  ac- 
complished, yet  its  effect  has  been  mighty 
already  on  the  principles  that  rule  among 
the  nations,  and  will  still  be  more  mighty 
until  the  lains  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Mes- 
siah shall  2'J>'evail  in  all  the  earth.  This 
seems  to  be  the  idea  which  it  is  designed 
to  express  by  this  prophetic  image.  If 
one  were  asked  in  ivhat  respects  it  is  to  be 
anticipated  that  these  changes  will  be 
wrought,  and  in  ichat  respects  we  can 
discern  the  evidences  of  such  changes 
already,  we  might  say  in  such  points 
as    the   following:  —  (1.)    In   regard    to 


the  methods  in  which  governments  are 
founded.  Governments  were  formerly 
mostly  the  result  of  civil  or  foreign  wars. 
Nearly  all  the  governments  of  antiquity 
were  originally  founded  in  the  poicer  of 
some  military  leader,  and  then  held  by 
power.  Christianity  originated  new  views 
ai)out  wars  and  conquests — views  that  will 
ultimately  prevail.  In  nothing  are  the 
opinions  of  mankind  destined  more  en- 
tirely to  be  reversed  than  in  regard  to 
irai — to  its  glory,  its  achievements,  and 
the  fame  of  those  who  have  been  most 
celebrated  for  bloody  triumphs.  (2.)  In 
regard  to  the  rights  of  the  people.  A 
mighty  principle  was  originated  by  Chris- 
tianity in  respect  to  the  rights  of  men — 
the  right  of  conscience ;  the  right  to  the 
avails  of  their  own  labour;  the  right  to 
life  and  liberty.  (3.)  In  regard  to  op- 
pression. The  history  of  tlie  world  has 
been  to  a  great  extent  a  history  of  op- 
pression. But  all  this  is  to  be  changed 
by  the  principles  of  the  true  religion ; 
and  when  the  period  shall  arrive  that 
there  shall  be  no  more  occasion  to  use 
the  word  ojtpiression,  as  descriptive  of  any- 
thing that  shall  have  an  actual  existence 
on  earth,  this  will  be  a  different  world. 
Then  the  time  will  have  come  appropri- 
ately designated  by  the  demolition  of  the 
colossal  statue  —  symbolic  of  all  govern- 
ments of  oppression,  and  the  substitution 
in  its  place  of  that  which  was  at  first  insig- 
nificant, but  which  had  vital  energy  to 
supplant  all  that  went  before  it. 

IV.  This  kingdom  will  be  perpetual. 
This  is  asserted  in  the  unequivocal  state- 
ments that  it  "  shall  never  be  destroyed," 
and  that  "it  shall  not  be  left  to  other 
people ;"  that  is,  shall  never  pass  into 
other  hands.  There  could  not  be  a  more 
positive  declaration  that  the  kingdom 
here  referred  to  will  continue  through  all 
coming  time.  Other  kingdoms  pass  awaj', 
but  this  will  not;  and  amidst  all  the  revo. 
lutions  of  other  empires  this  will  remain 
The  lapse  of  eighteen  hundred  years  since 
this  kingdom  was  set  up,  has  done  not  a 
little  to  confirm  the  truth  of  this  prediction 
Many  other  kingdoms  during  that  time 
have  disappeared  from  the  earth,  but  this 
remains  in  its  full  vigour,  and  with  ex- 
tending power.  It  has,  at  this  day,  an 
extent  of  dominion  which  it  never  had 
before,  and  there  are  clearer  indications 
that  it  will  spread  over  all  the  earth  than 
ever  existed  at  anj  previous  time.  That 
this  kingdom  will  be  perpetual,  may  be 


160 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  GOX 


ftrgucd  from  the  following  considerations  : 
(1.)  From  the  promises  of  God.  These 
are  tibsolute ;  and  they  are  attested  by 
Him  who  has  all  power,  and  who  can, 
■with  infinite  ease,  accomplish  all  that  ho 
has  spoken.  So  in  Dan.  vii.  14,  "  His  do- 
minion is  an  everlastinp;  dominion,  which 
shall  not  pass  away,  and  his  Icingdom  that 
which  shall  not  he  destroyed."  Luke  i. 
3.3,  "  And  he  shall  reign  over  the  house 
of  Jacob  for  ever:  and  of  his  kingdom 
there  shall  be  no  end."  Ps.  xlv.  6, 
(comp.  Notes  on  lleb.  i.  S),  "Thy  throne, 
0  God,  is  for  ever  and  ever."  In  Hebrews 
i.  8,  it  is,  "But  unto  the  Sqn  he  saith. 
Thy  throne,  0  God,  is  for  ever  and  ever." 
Isa.  ix.  7,  "  Of  the  increase  of  his  govern- 
ment and  power,  there  shall  he  no  end, 
upon  the  throne  of  David,  and  upon  his 
kingdom,  to  order  it,  and  to  establish  it 
■with  judgment  and  with  justice,  from 
henceforth  even  for  ever."  (2.)  It  may 
he  argued,  from  the  fact  that  the  efforts 
which  have  been  made  to  destroy  it  have 
shown  that  this  cannot  be  done  by  any  hu- 
man power.  Eighteen  hundred  years  have 
now  passed  away  —  a  period  sufficiently 
long  to  test  the  question  whether  it  can 
be  destroj-ed  by  force  and  violence ;  by 
argument  and  ridicule.  The  experiment 
has  been  fairly  made,  and  if  it  were  pos- 
sible that  it  should  be  destroj-ed  by  ex- 
ternal force,  it  would  have  been  done.  It 
cannot  be  imagined  that  more  favourable 
circumstances  for  such  a  purpose  will  ever 
occur.  The  church  of  Christ  has  met 
every  form  of  opposition  that  we  can 
conceive  could  be  made  against  it,  and 
has  survived  them  all.  Particularly  it 
has  survived  the  trial  which  has  been 
made  in  the  following  respects  :  (a)  The 
Roman  power,  the  whole  might  of  the 
Roman  arms,  that  had  subdued  and 
crushed  the  world,  was  brought  to  bear 
Upon  the  kingdom  of  Christ  to  crush  and 
destroy  it,  but  wholly  failed.  It  cannot  be 
supposed  that  a  new  power  will  ever  arise 
that  will  be  more  formidable  to  Chris- 
tianity than  the  Roman  was.  (6)  The 
power  of  persecution.  That  has  been 
tried  in  every  way,  and  has  failed.  The 
most  ingenious  forms  of  torture  have  been 
devised  to  extinguish  this  religion,  and 
have  all  failed.  It  has  alwa3-s  been  found 
that  persecution  has  only  contributed 
ultimately  to  the  triumph  of  the  cause 
Irhich  it  ■was  hoped  to  crush,  (c)  The 
power  of  philosophy.  The  ancient  phi- 
losophers  opposed  it,  and  attempted  to 


destroy  it  by  argument.  This  was  earlj 
done  by  Celsus  and  Porphyry  ;  but  it  soon 
became  apparent  that  the  ancient  philoso- 
phy had  nothing  that  could  extinguish  the 
rising  religion,  and  not  a  few  of  the  pro- 
minent philosophers  themselves  were  con- 
verted, and  became  the  advocates  of  the 
faith.  ((/)  The  power  of  science.  Chris- 
tianity had  its  origin  in  an  age  when 
science  had  made  comparatively  little  pro- 
gress, and  in  a  country  where  it  was 
almost  unknown.  The  sciences  since  have 
made  vast  advances  ;  and  each  one  in  ita 
turn  has  been  appealed  to  by  the  enemies 
of  religion,  to  furnish  an  argument 
against  Christianitj'.  Astronomy,  history, 
the  discoveries  in  Egypt,  the  asserted 
antiquity  of  the  Hindoos,  and  geology, 
have  all  been  emploj-ed  to  overthrow  the 
claims  of  the  Christian  religion,  and  have 
all  been  compelled  to  abandon  the  field. 
See  this  admirably  demonstrated  in  Dr. 
Wiseman's  lectures  on  the  connection 
between  science  and  revealed  religion, 
(c)  The  power  of  ridicule.  At  onetime  it 
was  held  that  '  ridicule  is  the  test  of 
truth,'  and  this  has  been  applied  un- 
sparingly to  the  Christian  religion.  But 
the  religion  still  lives,  and  it  cannot  be 
supposed  that  there  will  be  men  endued 
with  the  power  of  sarcasm  and  wit  supe- 
rior to  those  who,  with  these  weapons, 
have  made  ■war  on  Christianity,  or  that  in- 
fidelity has  any  hope  from  that  quarter. 
It  may  be  inferred,  therefore,  that  there  is 
no  cxtenml  source  of  corruption  and  decay 
which  will  prevent  its  being  perpetual. 
Other  kingdoms  usually  have  ;  and  after 
a  few  centuries  at  most  the  internal  cor- 
ruption— the  defect  of  the  organization — 
develops  itself,  and  the  kingdom  falls. 
But  nothing  of  this  kind  occurs  in  the 
kingdom  of  Christ.  It  has  lived  now 
through  eighteen  hundred  years,  through 
periods  of  the  world  in  which  there  have 
been  constant  changes  in  the  arts,  in  the 
sciences,  in  manners,  in  philosophj',  in 
forms  of  government.  During  that  time 
many  a  sj'stem  of  philosophy  has  been 
superseded,  and  many  a  kingdom  hua 
fallen,  but  Christianity  is  as  fresh  and 
vigorous  as  it  meets  each  coming  genera- 
tion as  it  ever  was ;  and  the  past  has 
demonstrated  that  the  enemies  of  the  gos- 
pel have  no  reason  to  hope  that  it  will 
become  weak  by  age,  and  will  fall  by  its 
own  decrepitude. 

V.  A  fifth  characteristic  of  this  king- 
dom is,  that  it  ■will  uni'versally  prevaiL 


B.C.  603.]  CHAPTER  II.  IGl 

46  1[  Then    the   king  Nebuchrid- '  nezzar  fell  upon  hig  face,  and  wor- 


This  was  symbolized  by  the  stone  that 
"became  a  great  mountain,  and  that  filled 
the  whole  earth."  ver.  35.  It  is  also  im- 
plied, in  the  statement  in  ver.  44,  that  it 
"  shall  break  in  pieces,  and  consume  all  j 
these  kingdoms."  They  Avill  cease,  and 
this  will  occupy  their  places.  The  pi-iii- 
ciples  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah, 
whatever  may  be  the  external  forms  of 
government  that  shall  exist  on  the  earlh, 
will  everywhere  prevail.  That  this  will 
occur,  may  be  argued  from  the  following 
considerations  :  (1.)  The  promises  recorded 
in  the  Bible.  The  passage  before  us  is 
one.  Of  the  same  nature  are  the  follow- 
ing: Ps.  ii.  8,  ''Ask  of  me,  and  I  shall 
give  thee  the  heathen  for  thine  inherit- 
ance, and  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth 
for  thy  possession."  Mai.  i.  11,  "For 
from  the  rising  of  the  sun  unto  the  going 
down  of  the  same,  mj'  name  shall  be  great 
among  the  Gentiles,  and  in  every  place 
incense  shall  be  offered  to  my  name,  and 
a  pure  offering."  Isa.  xi.  9,  "  The  earth 
shall  be  full  of  the  knowledge  of  the 
Lord,  as  the  w.aters  cover  the  sea."  Comp. 
Hab.  ii.  14 ;  Isa.  .xlv.  22,  and  Isa.  Ix. 
(2.)  The  world  in  its  progress  loses  nothing 
that  is  of  value.  Truth  is  eternal,  and 
when  once  discovered,  society  will  not  let 
it  go.  It  seizes  vipon  great  elements  in 
human  nature,  and  the  world  will  not  let 
it  die.  Thus  it  is  with  discoveries  in 
science,  in  inventions  in  the  arts,  and 
principles  in  morals.  There  is  no  evi- 
dence that  anything  that  was  known  to 
the  ancients  which  was  of  permanent  value 
to  mankind  has  been  lost ;  and  the  few 
things  that  were  lost  have  been  succeeded 
by  that  which  is  better.  All  that  was 
truly  valuable  in  their  science,  their  phi- 
losophy, their  arts,  their  jurisprudence, 
tlicir  literature,  we  possess  still,  and  the 
world  will  always  retain  it.  And  what 
can  ever  obliterate  from  the  memory  of 
man  the  printing-press,  the  steam-engine, 
the  cotton-gin,  the  telescope,  the  blow- 
pipe, the  magnetic  telegraph  ?  Society 
ACCUMULATES  from  age  to  age  all  that  is 
truly  valuable  iu  inventions,  morals,  and 
the  arts,  and  travels  with  them  down  to 
the  period  when  the  world  shall  have 
reached  the  highest  point  of  pcrfecta- 
biiity.  This  remark  is  true  also  of  Chris- 
tianity—  the  kingdom  of  Christ.  There 
are  ^jcuici'/j^fs  in  regard  to  the  happi- 
aess  and  rights  of  man  in  that  system, 
14* 


which  cannot  be  detached  from  society, 
but  which  go  into  its  permanent  struc- 
ture, and  which  '  the  world  will  riu» 
let  die.'  (3.)  Society  is  thus  inaking  con- 
stant advances.  A  position  gained  in  hu- 
man progress  is  never  ultimately  lost. 
"  The  principles  thus  accumulated  and 
incorporated  into  society  become  perma- 
nent. Each  age  adds  something  in  this 
respect  to  the  treasures  accumulated  by 
all  preceding  ages,  and  each  one  is,  in 
some  respects,  an  advance  on  its  prede- 
cessors, and  makes  the  final  triumph  of 
the  principles  of  truth,  and  liberty,  and 
pure  religion  more  sure.  (4.)  Christianitj', 
or  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  is  aggressive. 
It  makes  a  steady  war  on  the  evil  cus- 
toms, habits,  and  laws  of  the  world.  It 
is  in  accordance  with  its  nature  to  diffuse 
itself.  Nothing  can  prevent  its  propaga- 
tion ;  and,  according  to  the  laws  of  society, 
nothing  is  so  certain  philosophically  in 
regard  to  the  future,  as  the  final  preva- 
lence of  the  religion  of  the  Redeemer. 
It  may  meet  with  temporary  and  formi- 
dable obstructions.  It  may  be  retarded, 
or  extinguished,  in  certain  places.  But 
its  general  course  is  onward  —  like  the 
current  of  the  mighty  river  towards  the 
ocean.  The  only  thing  certain  in  the 
future  is,  that  the  Christian  religion  will 
yet  spread  all  over  the  world  ;  and  there 
is  enough  in  this  to  gratify  the  highest 
wishes  of  philanthropy,  and  enough  to 
stimulate  to  the  highest  effort  to  secure  so 
desirable  an  end. 

46.  Then  the  king  Kehuchadnezzar  fell 
vpon  his  face.  This  was  the  common 
method  of  signifying  profound  respect 
among  the  Orientals.  Comp.  Gen.  xvii. 
3,  1.  IS  ;  Lev.  ix.  24;  Num.  xiv.  5;  Josh. 
V.  14  ;  Judges  xii.  20  ;  Rev.  xi.  16.  ^  And 
worshipped  Daniel.  The  word  rendered 
icorshipped  here  —  I-??  —  in  the  Chaldee 
portions  of  the  Bible  is  uniformly  ren- 
dered rcorship.  Dan.  ii.  26 ;  iii.  5,  6,  7, 
10,  11,  12,  14,  15,  18,  28.  It  occurs  no- 
where else,  and  in  everj'  instance,  except  in 
the  one  before  us,  is  employed  with  refer- 
ence to  the  homage  p.aid  to  an  idol,  all  the 
other  cases  occuring  in  the  third  chapter 
respecting  the  image  that  was  set  up  by 
Nebuchadnezzar.  The  corresponding  He- 
brew word — ""J3 — occurs  only  in  Isa.  xliv. 
1  15,  17,   19,  xlvi.  6,  and  is,  in  every  in. 


im 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  603 


fihipped  Daniel,  and  commanded 
that  they  should  offer  an  oblation 
and  sweet  odours  unto  him. 


stance,  rendered  fnll  down,  also  ■with 
reference  to  idols.  The  proper  idea,  there- 
fore, of  the  word  here  is,  that  the  monarch 
meant  to  render  religions  homage  to 
Daniel,  or  such  adoration  as  was  usually 
paid  to  idols.  This  is  confirmed  by  what 
is  immediately  added,  that  he  commanded 
that  an  oblation  should  be  made  to  him. 
It  is  not,  however,  necessa,ry  to  suppese 
that  Daniel  received  or  ajii^jrovcd  this  re- 
ligious homage  of  the  king,  or  that  he  left 
the  impression  on  his  mind  that  he  was 
icilliiir/  to  be  honoured  as  a  god.  The 
prostration  of  the  king  before  him,  of 
course,  he  could  not  prevent.  The  views 
and  feelings  which  the  monarch  had  in 
doing  it,  he  could  not  prevent.  The  com- 
mand to  present  an  '  oblation  and  sweet 
odours  to  him,'  he  could  not  prevent. 
But  it  is  not  a  fair  inference  that  Daniel 
approved  this,  or  that  he  did  anything  to 
countenance  it,  or  even  that  he  did  not,  in 
a  proper  manner,  rebuke  it:  for  (1.)  we 
are  not  to  suppose  that  all  that  was  said 
was  recorded,  and  no  one  can  prove  that 
Daniel  did  not  express  his  disapprobation 
of  this  religious  honour  shown  to  him. 
(2.)  Daniel  had,  in  fact,  expressed  his 
views,  in  the  clearest  manner,  on  this  very 
point  before  the  monarch.  He  had,  again 
and  again,  disclaimed  all  power  to  be  able 
to  reveal  such  secrets.  He  had  directed 
his  mind  to  the  true  God,  as  he  who  alone 
could  disclose  coming  events,  vs.  28,  30, 
45.  He  had  taken  all  possible  precaution 
to  prevent  any  such  result,  by  declaring, 
in  the  most  emphatic  terms  (ver.  30),  that 
this  secret  was  not  revealed  to  him  '  on 
account  of  any  wisdom  which  be  had  more 
than  any  living.'  If  now,  after  all  this 
precaution,  and  these  disclaimers,  the 
king  should  prostrate  himself  before  him, 
and,  for  the  moment,  feel  that  he  was  in 
the  presence  of  a  God,  Daniel  was  not 
responsible  for  it,  and  it  should  not  be 
inferred  that  he  encouraged  or  approved 
it.  (3.)  It  would  seem,  from  the  narrative 
itself,  more  than  probable  that  Daniel 
did  refuse  the  homage,  and  direct  the 
thoughts  of  the  monarch  to  the  true  God. 
Iti  the  very  next  verse  it  is  said,  "  The 
king  answered  unto  Daniel,  and  said,  of  a 
truth  it  is,  that  your  God  is  a  God  of 
gods,  and   a   Lord  of  kings,  and  a  re- 


47  The  king  answered  unto  Da» 
niel,  and  said,  Of  a  trutn  it  is,  that 
your  God  is  a  God  of  gods,  and  a 


vealer  of  secrets."  Anstcered  what? 
Perhaps  something  that  was  said  by 
Daniel.  At  all  events,  it  is  clear  from 
this  that  whatever  were  the  momentary 
expressions  of  wonder,  gratitude,  and 
adoration,  on  the  part  of  the  king,  his 
thoughts  soon  passed  to  the  proper  ob- 
ject of  worship  —  the  true  God.  *J  And 
commanded,  &c.  The  fact  that  this  was 
commanded  does  not  prove  that  it  was 
done.  The  command  was  pi'obablj'  given 
under  the  excitement  of  his  admiration 
and  wonder.  But  it  does  not  follow  that 
Daniel  received  it,  or  that  the  command 
was  not  recalled  on  reflection,  or  that  the 
oblation  and  odors  may  not  have  been 
presented  to  the  true  God.  ^  That  they 
should  offer  an  oblation.  That  is,  his 
attendants,  or  perhaps  the  priests  to  whom 
pertained  the  duty  of  making  offerings  to 
the  gods.  The  word  rendered  oblation — 
^\\K — does  not  refer  to  a  bloodi/  sacrifice, 
but  means  a  gift  or  present  of  any  kind. 
It  is  applied  in  the  Scriptures  to  denote 
(1.)  a  gift,  or  j)resent  (Gen.  xxxii.  14, 
19,  21,  xliii.  11,  15,  25,  26) ;  (2.)  tribute, 
sucli  as  was  exacted  from  a  subject  na- 
tion, under  the  notion  of  a  present  (2  Sam. 
viii.  2,  G;  1  Kings  v.  1);  (3.)  an  offering, 
or  sacrifice  to  God,  especially  a  bloodless 
offering,  in  opposition  to  n3r — a  bloody 
sacrifice,  Lev.  ii.  1,  4,  5,  6,  vi.  7,  vii.  9 ; 
Ps.  xl.  7 ;  Jer.  xvii.  26.  See  the  word 
fully  explained  in  the  Notes  on  Isa.  i.  13. 
There  can  be  no  dov;bt  that  Nebuchad- 
nezzar meant  that  such  an  offering  should 
be  presented  as  was  usually  made  in  idol 
worship.  ^  And  sweet  odors.  Incense 
was  commonly  used  in  worship  (see  Notes 
on  Isa.  i.  13),  and  it  is  not  improbable 
that  in  the  worship  of  the  gods  it  was  ac- 
companied with  other  fragrant  odors. 
Sweet  odors,  or  '  savors,'  expressed  by  the 
same  word  which  is  used  here,  were  a 
part  of  the  prescribed  worship  in  the  He- 
brew ritual.  Lev.  i.  9,  13,  17,  ii.  2,  9,  iii. 
5,  vi.  14;  Num.  xv.  7. 

47.  The  king  answered  Daniel.  An- 
swered cither  what  he  had  said  in  the 
interpretation  of  the  dream,  or  possibly 
something  that  he  had  said  in  regard  to 
the  impropriety  of  offering  this  homage 
to  him.     Comp.  Notes  on  ver.  46.     It  ia 


B.  C.  603. 


CHAPTER   II. 


163 


Lord  of  kings,  and  a  revealer  of 
secrets,  seeing  thou  couldest  reveal 
this  secret. 

48  Then  the  king  made  Daniel  a 
great    man,  and  gave    him  many 


certain  that,  for  some  cause,  whatever 
might  have  been  the  homage  which  he 
was  disposed  to  render  to  Daniel,  his 
thoughts  were  soon  turned  from  liim  to  the 
true  God,  and  to  an  acknowledgment  of 
him  as  superior  to  all  other  beings.  He 
seems,  at  least,  instantly  to  have  reflected 
on  what  Daniel  had  himself  said  (ver.  30), 
and  to  have  remembered  that  religious 
homage  was  due,  not  to  Daniel,  but  to 
the  God  who  had  communicated  the  secret 
to  him.  ^  0/ a  truth  it  is.  It  is  truly  so. 
This  had  been  shown  by  the  manner  in 
which  this  secret  was  disclosed.  ^  That 
your  God  is  a  God  of  gods.  Is  superior 
to  all  other  gods ;  is  supreme  over  all. 
Comp.  Rev.  xvii.  14 ;  1  Tim.  vi.  15.  The 
Idea  is,  that  whatever  subordinate  beings 
tliere  may  be,  he  is  supreme,  ^  And  a 
Lord  of  kings.  Supreme  over  kings. 
They  are  all  inferior  to  him,  and  subject 
to  his  control.  *^  And  a  revealer  of  secrets. 
One  of  the  attributes  of  divinity.  See 
Notes  on  ver.  28.  ^  Seeing  thou  coxddest 
reveal  this  secret.  A  secret  which  the 
wisest  men  of  the  realm  had  sought 
in  vain  to  disclose.  The  fact  that  a  pro- 
fessed servant  of  God  had  been  able  to  do 
this,  showed  that  God  was  himself  su- 
preme, and  worthy  of  adoration.  We 
have  here,  then,  an  instance  in  which  a 
proud  and  haughty  heathen  monarch  was 
brought  to  an  acknowledgment  of  the  true 
God,  and  was  constrained  to  render  him 
homage.  This  was  a  result  which  it  was 
evidently  intended  to  reach  in  the  whole 
transaction:  in  the  dream  itself;  in  the 
fact  that  the  wise  men  of  Babylon  could 
not  interpret  it  j  and  in  the  fact  that  an 
acknondedged  servant  of  the  Most  High 
had  been  enabled  to  make  the  dis- 
closure. The  instance  is  instructive,  as 
showing  to  what  extent  .a  mind  clearly 
not  under  the  influence  of  any  genuine 
piety — for  subsequent  events  showed  that 
uo  2jcrntane»(  eflects  were  produced  on 
him,  and  that  he  was  still  an  idolater 
(ch.  iii.),  and  a  most  proud  and  haughty 
man  (ch.  iv.),  —  may  be  brought  to  ao- 
knonriedge  God.  Sue  the  remarks  at  the 
end  of  the  chapter  (7.) 

■xQ,   Then  the  king  made  Daniel  a  great 


great  *  gifts,  and  made  him  ruler 
over  the  whole  province  of  Babylon, 
and  chief  of  the  ^  governors  over  all 
the  wise  men  of  Babylon. 

^  ver.  0.  b  c.  4.  9,  5. 11. 


man.  That  is,  he  gave  him  an  honourable 
appointment;  he  so  honoured  him  that  ho 
was  regarded  as  a  great  man.  lie  was 
really  made  great  by  the  grace  of  God, 
and  the  extraordinary  favour  which  God 
had  bestowed  upon  him,  but  the  estimate 
which  the  king  had  of  his  greatness  was 
shown  by  the  tokens  of  the  royal  favour, 
^  And  gave  him  many  great  gifts.  This  is 
a  common  way  of  showing  esteem  in  the 
East.  The  estimate  in  which  one  holds 
another  is  evinced  by  the  variet}'  and 
richness  of  the  presents  conferred  on  him. 
Hence  every  person  of  distinction  expects 
gifts  of  those  who  approach  them  as  ex- 
pressive of  their  regard  for  them,  and  of 
the  esteem  in  which  they  are  held.  Comp, 
ver.  6.  of  this  chapter,  ^  ^'"^  made  him 
ruler  over  the  whole  province  of  Babylon. 
Chald,  i^;  f  i? — caused  him  to  preside  over, 
or  to  rule  over,  from  the  verb  '-2^'^' — shelat, 
to  ride,  and  commonly  applied  to  one  who 
rules  as  a  prince,  or  in  an  elevated  office. 
From  this  word  the  terms  sultan,  and 
sidtana  are  derived,  \  And  chief  of  the 
governors  over  all  the  wise  men  of  Babylon. 
This  would  seem  to  be  an  appointment 
which  did  not  pertain  to  him  as  governor 
of  the  province  of  Babj'lon,  or  as  presid- 
ing in  the  capital,  but  was  a  separate  ap- 
pointment, and,  therefore,  an  additional 
mark  of  favour.  The  phrase  'chief  of 
the  governors,'  would  seem  to  imply  that 
the  magi  of  Babylon  were  disposed  in 
certain  orders  or  classes,  each  of  which 
had  its  appropriate  head,  like  the  head 
of  a  college  or  universitj%  Daniel  was 
placed  over  the  whole  as  the  president, 
principal,  or  chancellor.  It  had  been  the 
policy  of  Nebuchadnezzar  to  assemble  at 
the  capital  the  principal  talent  and  learn- 
ing of  the  realm.  Comp.  Notes  ch.  i.  IS- 
20,  ii.  2.  Daniel  thus,  in  both  these 
stations  of  honour  at  an  early  period  of 
life,  though  recently  an  unknown  stranger, 
iind  a  captive,  was  exalted  to  the  highest 
honours  which  could  be  conferred  on  a 
subject,  and  raised  to  posts  of  distinciion 
which  would  usually  be  regarded  as  the 
highest  rewards  which  could  be  obtained 


164 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  G03 


49  Then  Daniel  requested  of  the  |  affairs  of  the  province  of  Babylon : 
kino;,   and  ''he   set  Shadrach,  Me-    but  Daniel  sat  ''in  the  gate  of  the 


shach,    and 


Abed-nego, 
^  c.  3.  12. 


over    the 


by  a  long  life  of  clevotcdneBS  to  the  wel- 
fare of  the  countiy. 

49.  Then  Daniel  requested  of  the  king. 
In  his  own  remarkable  prosperity,  and  in 
the  extraordinary  honours  conferred  on 
him,  he  did  not  forget  the  companions  of 
his  humbler  days.  They  were  his  coun- 
trymen ;  they  had  been  cnptives  with 
him ;  they  had  been  selected  with  a  view 
to  stand  with  him  before  the  king  (eh.  i. 
3,  4) ;  they  had  shared  with  him  in  his 
rules  of  abstinence  (ch.  i.  11-17) :  they  had 
all  passed  an  honourable  examiuation 
before  the  king  (ch.  i.  IS,  19);  they  had 
united  with  him  in  supplication  to  God 
that  he  would  disclose  thff  meaning  of  the 
vision  (ch.  ii.  17,  IS),  and  now  it  was 
proper  that  they  should  be  remembered 
by  him  who  had  been  so  signally  hon- 
oured. ^  Over  the  affairs  of  the  province 
of  Babylon.  In  what  particular  depart- 
ments of  business  the3'  were  employed  is 
not  mentioned;  but  it  would  seem  that 
all  that  specially  pertained  to  this  pro- 
vince was  intrusted  to  them.  Daniel  had 
the  general  superintendence,  but  the 
subordinate  duties  growing  out  of  the 
office  were  intrusted  to  them.  The  fact 
that  the  king  granted  the  request,  shows 
the  influence  that  Daniel  had  at  the 
court.     The  reasons  which  influenced  the 


kin  IT. 


b  KstherS.  ao,  3.  2. 


king  in  granting  the  request,  may  have 
been  not  only  the  favour  with  which  he  re- 
garded Daniel,  but  the  fact  that  the  duties 
of  the  office  conferred  on  him  now  were 
such  as  to  require  assistance,  and  the  re- 
membrance of  the  virtues  of  these  youths 
when  they  stood  before  him.  ^  But 
Daniel  sat  in  the  r/ate  of  the  Icing.  The 
post  of  chief  honour  and  dignity  as  a 
counsellor  of  the  king.  The  gate  of  a  city 
in  the  East,  being  a  chief  place  of  con- 
course, was  the  place  where  courts  were 
held,  and  public  business  was  usually 
transacted.  See  Notes  on  Job  xxix.  7. 
To  say,  therefore,  that  he  'sat  in  the  gate 
of  the  king,'  is  merely  to  say  that  he  oc- 
cupied a  place  with  the  chief  counsellors 
and  dignitaries  of  the  realm.  The  phrase 
'  Sublime  Porte,'  that  is,  '  the  Sublime 
Gate,'  is  still  employed  at  Constantinople 
to  denote  the  government  of  the  Sultan ; 
for  in  the  earlier  daj-s  of  Ottoman  rule, 
the  reigning  sovereign,  as  is  still  the  case 
in  some  parts  of  the  East,  held  courts  of 
justice  and  levees  at  the  entrance  of  his 
residence.  See  Harper's  Magazine,  vol. 
iv.  p.  333.  The  office  of  Daniel  was, 
perhaps,  not  far  different  from  that  of 
the  Grand  Vizier  of  the  Turkish  govern- 
ment. See  Murray's  Ency.  Geog.  vol.  ii. 
p.  202. 


REMARKS. 

Among  the  lessons  of  practical  value  suggested  by  this  chapter,  we  may  notice  the  fol- 
lowing : — 

(1.)  Wo  have  an  itistancc  (vs.  1-3)  of  the  methods  which  were  resoited  to  in  the  early  periods 
of  the  world  to  ascertain  what  the  future  woukl  be.  Tliis  great  nuinarch  relied  on  a  dream 
which  greatly  disturbed  him,  and  on  the  power  which  he  supposed  was  intrusted  to  men  to 
interpret  dreams.  In  common  with  the  prevailing  spirit  of  his  times,  and  of  all  ancient  times 
(Notes,  ver.  1),  he  believed  that  dreams  might  be  regarded  as  prognostics  of  future  events;  that 
they  were  under  divine  direction  ;  and  tbat  all  that  was  necessary  to  make  them  safe  guides  in 
reference  to  what  is  to  occur,  was  that  they  should  be  properly  interpreted.  In  common,  too, 
witli  all  the  people  of  ancient  times,  and  with  most  of  modern  times,  the  king  here  referred  to 
had  jvn  earnest  desire  to  look  into  the  future.  There  has  been  no  desire  in  the  human  bosom 
stronger  than  this.  We  are  so  made  that  we  wish  to  lift  the  mysterious  veil  which  shrouds  the 
future;  to  penetrate  the  deep  darkness  which  rests  on  the  unseen  world.  Our  creat  interests 
are  there.  The  past  is  fixed,  and  cannot  now  affect  us,  except  by  the  consequences  of  what  we 
have  done,  and  by  teaching  us  lessons  of  value  derived  from  our  own  observation,  aud  that  of 
others.  But  the  future  is  not  yet  fixed.  Man,  so  anxious  to  know  what  this  is  to  be.  finds 
himself  in  respect  to  it  peculiarly  endowed.  In  relation  to  the  past,  he  is  endowed  with  the 
faculty  of  me.niiiry,  but  with  nothing  corresponding  to  this  pcrtaiuing  to  the  future.  He  can 
treasure  up  what  Juts  occurred,  but  he  cannot  in  like  manner  make  the  future  pass  before  bis 
mind,  that  he  may  become  wise  by  knowing  what  will  take  place  in  far  distant  times.  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  God  could  have  endowed  the  mind  with  one  faculty  as  well  as  the  other— 
ior  he  has  it  hiniself^but  there  were  obvious  reasons  why  it  should  not  be  done.  l>estitute  then 
1^  man  was  of  this  power,  one  great  object  of  human  inquiry  has  been  to  see  whether  the 


B.C.  603.]  CHAPTER   I  i.  165 

deficiency  could  he  supplied,  and  whether  something  might  not  be  found  which  would  lie  to  thy 
future  substantially  what  the  memory  is  to  the  past.  The  efforts  and  results  on  tliis  subject — 
one  of  whicli  we  have  in  the  chapter  before  us — constitute  one  of  the  most  instructive  chapters 
of  the  history  of  our  race,  and  show  how  effectually  Ciod  has  bounded  the  limits  of  human  iu- 
Testigation  in  this  respect.  Among  those  methods  of  attempting  to  penetrate  the  future,  and 
of  I'xyiug  open  its  deep  mysteries,  may  be  noticed  the  following : — 

(ii)  Astrology.  It  was  suppo.';ed  that  the  stars  might  exert  an  influence  over  the  fates  of 
men,  and  that  by  observing  their  position'!,  conjunctions,  and  oppositions,  it  might  be  ascer- 
tained what  would  be  the  destiny  ofindividu  vis  and  nations,  the  belief  of  this  hac  manifested 
itself  more  or  less  in  every  age;  and  in  such  instances  as  in  the  word  lunacy,  and  in  the  common 
apprehensions  about  the  inUuence  of  the  moon  on  health,  and  on  vegetation,  may  be  still  seen 
traces  of  tliat  belief  Even  Lord  Bacon  held  that  '  astrology  was  a  science  not  to  be  ri'jexi'.'i^ 
but  reformed;'  and  in  the  early  periods  of  the  world  it  was  a.  fair  subject  of  investigation 
whether  tlie  heavenly  bodies  actually  exerted  such  an  influence,  and  whether,  if  it  were  so,  it 
was  possible  to  ascertain  the  laws  by  which  this  was  done.  This  was  the  sf  called  science  of 
astrology. 

(6)  Necromancy.  The  belief  of  this  also  prevailed  in  nearly  all  ancient  nations,  and  we  find 
frequent  reference  to  it  in  the  Scriptures.  This  consisted  in  the  belief  that  the  dead  must  be 
acquainted  with  the  world  where  they  now  dwell,  so  dark  to  the  living,  and  that  it  might  be 
possible  to  make  a  covenant  or  compact  with  them  by  which  they  would  be  induced  to  dis- 
close what  they  knew.  It  was  extensively,  if  not  universally,  believed  that  they  re-appeared 
to  men,  and  that  it  was  not  an  uncommon  occurrence  for  tliem  to  leave  their  abodes,  and  to 
visit  the  earth  again.  It  was,  therefore,  not  an  unnatural,  and  not  an  unfair  subject  of 
inquiry,  whether  they  would  not  disclose  to  the  more  favoured  among  mortals  what  they 
knew  of  the  secrets  of  the  invisible  world,  and  what  they  knew  of  events  which  were  to  come. 
Comp.  Notes  on  Isa.  viii.  19. 

(c)  The  arts  of  divination.  Tliese  were  founded  mainly  on  the  investigations  of  science.  It 
was  at  first  a  fair  question  whether,  amidst  the  wonders  which  science  was  unfolding  to  the 
view,  it  might  not  contribute  to  lift  the  veil  from  the  future,  and  reveal  what  was  yet  to  come. 
It  took  long  to  ascertain  what  were  the  legitimate  aims  of  science,  and  what  might  be  hoped 
for  from  it.  Hence  it  was  directed  to  the  inquiry  whether  some  substance  might  not  be  found 
which  would  transmute  all  things  to  gold;  whether  some  elixer  might  not  be  discovered  which 
would  arrest  all  disease,  and  give  immortality  to  man;  and  whether  science  would  not  disclose 
some  means  by  which  the  future  could  be  penetrated,  and  the  mysteries  of  the  invisible  world 
be  laid  open  to  the  view.  It  required  centuries  of  investigation,  a  thousand  failures,  and  the 
results  of  long  and  patient  thought,  to  ascertain  what  were  the  true  objects  of  science,  and  to 
convince  the  world  that  it  was  not  its  legitimate  purpose  to  reveal  the  future  to  man. 

(d)  Heathen  oracles.  It  was  an  early  inquiry  whether  God  would  not,  in  some  way,  lift  the 
veil  from  the  future,  and  disclose  its  secrets  to  man.  The  belief  that  this  would  be  done  seems 
to  be  natural  to  the  mind  of  man ;  and  in  all  ages,  and  in  all  countries,  he  has  supposed  that 
the  future  would  thxis  be  disclosed.  Hence,  among  the  heathen,  certain  persons  claimed  to 
be  divinely  inspired :  hence  such  shrines  as  that  at  Delphi  became  celebrated;  hence  ambiguous 
responses  were  uttered,  so  expressed  as  to  support  the  credit  of  the  oracle,  whatever  might  bo 
the  result;  hence  men  were  appointed  to  observe  the  flights  of  birds,  to  inspect  the  entrails  of 
animals  offered  in  sacrifice,  to  interpret  any  unusual  phenomena  in  the  clouds,  to  mark  the 
direction  of  meteors,  and,  in  general,  to  examine  any  unusual  appearances  in  the  heavens  or 
the  eartli,  which  would  seem  to  furnish  any  clew  by  which  the  future  might  be  known. 
Much  of  all  this  undoubtedly  became  mere  imposture,  and  justified  the  remark  of  Cicero  that 
he  wondered  that  one  Augur  could  meet  another  without  laughing;  but  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  by  many  these  inquiries  were  honestly  pursued,  and  that  at  first  .all  this  seemed  to  he  a 
legitimate  subject  of  inquiry.  What  forbade  man  to  pursue  it?  And  who  could  tell  but  that 
in  some  such  ways  the  secrets  of  the  mj'sterious  future  could  be  found  out?  It  demanded 
long  and  patient  inquiry  and  observation  to  show  that  this  could  not  be  so,  and  that  whatever 
inigld  be  indicated  by  any  of  these  things,  it  was  never  designed  that  they  should  be  the 
means  by  which  man  could  be  made  acquainted  with  the  mysteries  of  the  invisible  world. 

(f)  Dreams.  AVe  have  seen  (Notes,  ver.  1)  that  it  was  an  early  article  of  belief  that  through 
the  medium  of  dreams  the  divine  will  might  be  made  known,  and  the  secrets  of  the  future 
disclosed.  The  Uieory  on  this  suViject  seems  to  have  been,  that  during  sleep  the  ordinary  laws 
of  the  mind  are  suspended ;  that  the  soul  is  abstracted  from  the  visible  world ;  that  the  thoughts 
which  it  has  then  must  be  originated  by  higher  beings;  and  that  in  this  state  it  has  converse 
with  an  invisible  world,  and  may  be  permitted  to  see  much  of  what  is  yet  to  occur.  Comp. 
Intro,  to  Isaiah,  J  7,  (2). 

(/)  Visions.  Men  supposed  tliat  these  might  be  representations  made  to  certain  favoured 
persons  respecting  the  future,  their  senses  being  closed  to  surrounding  objects,  and  that  while 
in  an  ecstaey,  or  trance,  the  mind  might  have  a  view  of  future  events.  Such  were  the  virions 
of  Balaam ;  such,  in  a  remarkable  manner,  were  the  visions  of  the  true  prophets ,  and  so 
deeply  was  the  conviction  that  this  miglit  occur  engrafted  in  the  human  mind,  that  the 
beli  if  of  it  seems  to  have  had  a  place  among  the  heathen  nations.  Comp.  Intro,  to  Isaiah, 
47.(4). 

ouch  were  some  of  the  ways  by  which  it  was  supposed  that  the  future  might  he  penetrated 
by  man,  and  its  secrets  disclosed.  By  allowing  man  to  make  trial  of  these  methods,  and  to 
pursue  them  through  a  period  of  several  thousand  years,  until  ho  himself  saw  that  they  wen 


i66  DANIEL.  [B.C.  60a 

fruitless,  God  was  preparing  the  race  to  feel  the  necessity  of  direct  communications  from  himsell^ 
and  to  welcome  the  true  revelations  which  he  would  make  respectiog  things  to  come. 

(2.)  We  have  in  tlie  chapter  before  us  (vs.  4-11)  an  instance  of  Oie,  acknnwJedgcd  failure  of  a 
class  of  the  wisest  of  men,  whose  lives  were  devoted  to  this  employment,  in  their  attempts  to 
disclose  the  future.  This  is  a  fair  illustration  of  all  the  attempts  of  the  heathen,  and  it  was 
doubtless  permitted  in  order  that  it  might  lie  seen  tliat  all  such  attempts  7nust  fail.  The 
magicians,  astrologers,  and  Chaldeans  were  fuilcd  in  a  case  which  fairly  came  within  the  pro- 
vince of  their  art,  and  when  pretenders  to  this  kind  of  knowledge  ou(jht  to  have  Iwen  able  to 
solve  the  difiBculties  of  thr  monarch.  Regarding  this  as  a  fair  illustration  of  all  the  attempt* 
of  the  heathen  to  penetra'e  the  future,  and  to  discover  the  great  truths  which  it  is  desirablo 
for  man  to  know,  there  are  three  observations  which  may  be  made  in  regard  to  it: — I.  The 
trial  has  been  a  fair  one.  (n)  There  was  time  enough  allowed  for  it.  It  was  about  four  thou- 
sand years  from  the  creation  of  man  to  the  time  when  the  canon  of  Scripture  was  completed, 
and  promulgated  to  the  wliole  world,  and  it  could  not  be  said  that  man  required  a  longer 
time  to  test  the  question  whether  he  needed  a  revelation,  (b)  Tlie  trial  was  a  fair  one.  because 
it  was  one  which  men  were  at  liberty  to  pursvie  to  any  extent,  and  which  was  conducted  under 
the  best  advantages.  It  was  confined  to  no  country  or  favoured  class  of  men.  In  all  lands, 
and  with  every  advantage  of  climate,  government,  and  laws,  man  has  been  engaged  in  the 
great  inquiry,  and  if  it  be  remembered  what  immense  numbers  of  minds  have  been  employed 
in  these  investigations,  it  cannot  be  pretended  that  the  utmost  desirable  freedom  has  not  been 
allowed  to  man  to  test  the  question  whether  '  by  searching  he  can  find  out  God,'  and  disclose 
the  future,  (c)  The  same  thing  is  true  in  respect  to  the  talent  which  has  been  employed  in 
this  investigation.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  the  highest  talent  that  the  world  has  pro- 
duced has  been  engaged  in  these  inquiries,  and  that  the  rejectors  of  revelation  cannot  hope 
that  higher  powers  can  be  brought  to  bear  on  it,  or  that  the  unaided  human  intellect  can  hops 
to  accomplish  more  in  this  respect  than  has  been  done.  The  profoundest  minds  in  Egypt  and 
Chaldea  were  engaged  in  inquiries  of  this  sort.  The  very  highest  talent  which  Greece  pro- 
duced in  its  best  days  was  employed  on  questions  of  religion ;  in  attempts  to  find  out  God,  to 
ascertain  the  relations  of  man  to  him,  and  to  determine  what  man  was  to  be  hereafter. 
■\Vhat  was  true,  also,  of  the  ancient  heathen,  and  of  the  modern  heathen,  that  the  best  talent 
has  been  employed  on  these  questions,  is  true  al.so  of  the  rejectors  of  revelation  in  Christian 
lands.  Men  of  liigh  powers  of  intellect  have  refused  to  acknowledge  the  Bible  as  a  revelation, 
and  have  chosen  to  fall  back  on  the  unaided  resources  of  their  own  minds.  Aided  with  all 
that  science  and  learning  can  do,  they  have  inquired  after  a  system  of  religion  that  would 
commend  itself  to  man  as  true,  and  as  adapted  to  his  w.ants;  and  it  cannot  be  pretended  that 
man  in  this  respect  has  not  had  a  fair  opportunity  to  show  what  the  human  powers  can  do, 
(d)  The  trial  has  been  a  fair  one  in  regard  to  the  field  of  investigation.  Astrology,  necromancy, 
abstruse  natural  science,  oracles,  dreams,  visions,  the  observation  of  the  course  of  events — all 
these  have  been  open  before  man,  and  in  one  and  all  of  them  he  has  been  allowed  to  pursue 
his  investigations  at  pleasure.  II.  There  has  been  an  entire  failure  in  the  attempt.  The 
Chaldeans  failed  in  Babylon,  as  the  magicians  had  done  in  Egypt,  to  explain  what  was  regarded 
as  a  prognostic  of  the  future,  and  in  both  cases  it  was  necessary  to  call  in  the  aid  of  one  who 
had  a  direct  communication  from  heaven.  The  same  has  been  the  case  in  all  attempts  to  ex- 
plain the  future,  and  to  disclose  what  man  was  so  desirous  of  knowing  about  the  invisible 
world,  (a)  All  reliance  on  astrology,  necromancy,  oracles,  dreams,  and  the  revelations  of  the 
abstruser  sciences,  has  failed.  Astrology  has  ceased  to  bo  a  science,  and  the  stars  are  studied 
for  other  purposes  than  to  disclose  future  events;  necromancy  has  ceased  to  be  a  science — for 
no  one  now  hopes  to  bo  able  to  make  a  compact  with  the  dead,  in  virtue  of  which  they  will 
disclose  the  secrets  of  the  invisible  world ;  no  one  now  would  consult  a  heathen  oracle  with  the 
hope  of  receiving  a  response  to  his  inquiries  that  might  be  relied  on;  the  abstruser  sciences  are 
pursued  for  other  purposes,  and  no  one  would  repose  on  dreams  to  furnish  a  system  of  truth 
which  would  meet  the  wants  of  man.  {h)  The  same  thing  has  been  true  in  regard  to  the 
various  systems  of  rdigion  on  which  men  have  relied.  It  is  true  of  the  systems  of  the  heathen. 
They  have  been  tried  in  the  most  ample  manner,  and  have  shown  that  they  do  not  meet  the 
wants  of  man.  The  experiment  has  been  fairly  made,  and  the  system  is  becoming  worse  and 
worse.  It  is  not  adapted  to  elevate  man  in  the  scale  of  being  in  regard  to  the  present  life;  it 
does  not  remove  the  evils  which  press  now  upon  the  race;  it  does  not  disclose  a  certain  way  by 
which  a  sinner  may  be  prepared  for  the  life  to  come.  Jt  is  truein  ■>  •gard  to  an  atonement  for  sin. 
The  attempt  has  been  made  now  for  nearly  six  thousand  years,  t)  find  some  way  in  which  an 
efficacious  sacrifice  may  be  made  for  sin.  Blood  has  been  poured  ,in  thousands  of  alt.ars ;  ani- 
mals have  been  offered,  and  thousands  of  human  beings  have  been  devoted  to  the  gods,  but 
still  there  has  been  no  evidence  that  these  bloody  ofTerings  have  been  accepted,  or  that  they 
have  availed  to  expiate  transgression.  The  experiment  has  failed.  There  is  no  new  sacrifice 
that  can  be  offered  now,  and  it  is  hopeless  for  man  to  attempt  to  make  expiation  for  his  own 
sins.  The  saine  thing  is  true  of  the  systems  of  religion  proposed  by  infulelity.  They  are  all 
failures.  One  system  after  another  is  abandoned,  and  no  one  is  such  as  the  race  needs.  The 
best  talent  that  infidelity  can  hope  to  produce  has  been  exhausted  in  this  undertaking;  for 
how  can  it  hope  to  produce  men  better  titled  to  propose  a  system  of  religion  to  mankind  than 
Shaftesbury,  or  Hobbes,  or  Tindal,  or  Herbert,  or  Voltaire,  or  Hume?  Yet,  after  all  that  has 
been  done  by  infidelity  in  modern  times,  an  intelligent  man  would  prefer  trusting  his  eternal 
Interests  to  such  a  system  as  Socrates  would  propose  to  one  proposed  by  Hume;  he  would  feel 
laffot  under  the  guidance  of  Cicero  or  Seneca  than  under  the  direction  of  Voltaire  or  Gibbon. 


B.C.  C03.J  CHAPTER   II.  167 

m.  The  reasons  why  God  has  permitted  this  trial  to  be  made,  in  such  a  manner,  and  with 
such  results,  are  obvious.  In  tlie  cases  which  occurred  in  the  time  of  Pliaraoh  in  Egypt,  and 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  in  Babylon,  the  reason  evidently  was,  that  wlien  there  was  an  acknow- 
ledged failure  of  the  power  of  the  magicians,  God  might  himself,  through  .Tcseph  and  Daniel, 
get  honour  to  his  own  name.  So  the  reasons  why  he  has  permitted  this  trial  to  be  made  on  a 
large  scale,  and  has  suffered  it  everywhere  to  fail,  are  probably  these  two:  (1.)  To  show  to  man, 
in  such  a  way  as  to  admit  of  no  doubt,  his  need  of  revelation;  and  (2.)  To  induce  him  to  prize 
the  volume  of  revealed  truth.  Wo  should  value  it  the  more,  and  adhere  to  it  the  more  firmly, 
in  view  of  the  experiment  which  has  been  made  in  all  lands.  Xitltat  revelation  be  rejected,  man 
has  HO  resource;  he  is  wholly  unable  to  penetrate  the  future;  he  can  devi.se  no  way  of  making 
atonement  for  sin  ;  he  can  originate  no  system  that  shall  alleviate  the  soi'rows  under  which  we 
groan,  or  disclose  the  prospect  of  happiness  beyond  the  tomb.  For  if  the  Bible  is  taken  away, 
on  what  shall  we  f;dl  back  to  guide  us?  On  astrology;  on  necromancy;  on  heathen  oracles  and 
sacrifices ;  on  dreams ;  on  the  ravings  of  priestesses  at  heathen  shrines,  or  the  speculations  of 
infidelity  in  Christian  lands?  All  these  have  been  tried  in  vain.  The  Bible  is  the  only  guide 
on  which  man  can  rely  to  conduct  him  to  heaven.  If  that  fails,  all  fails,  and  man  is  in  the 
midst  of  impenetrable  night. 

(3.)  We  may  learn  from  this  chapter  (vs.  12-10),  that  in  the  perplexities  and  trials  which 
arise  in  life,  a  good  man  may  appeal  to  God  for  guidance  and  help.  So  Daniel  felt,  when  all 
human  power  had  failed,  in  complying  with  the  demands  of  a  stern  and  arbitrary  monarch, 
and  when  he  and  his  friends,  though  innocent,  were  about  to  be  involved  in  the  sweeping  sen- 
tence which  had  been  issued  against  the  wise  men  of  Babylon.  Then  it  was  clear  that  nothing 
could  save  them  but  divine  interposition  ;  nothing  could  avert  the  stroke  but  such  a  heavenly 
intiuence  as  would  disclose  the  secret,  and  thus  avert  the  wrath  of  the  king.  In  this  emergency, 
Daniel  felt  that  he  mir/ht  call  upon  God,  and  to  this  service  he  summoned  also  his  three 
friends,  who  were  equally  interested  with  him  in  the  issue.  In  view  of  this  we  may  observe: 
I.  That  all  good  men  are  liable  to  meet  with  similar  perplexities  and  embarrassments ;  to  be 
placed  in  circumstances  where  nothing  but  the  interposition  of  God  can  help  them.  This  is 
true  in  such  respects  as  the  following :  («)  In  reference  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  The 
mind  is  often  perplexed  on  the  subject  of  religion;  reason  fails  to  disclose  tho.se  truths  which  it 
is  desirable  to  know;  darkness  and  obscurity  seem  to  envelop  the  whole  subject;  the  soul,  op- 
pressed with  a  .sense  of  conscious  guilt,  seeks  to  find  some  way  of  peace ;  the  heart,  entangled 
in  the  meshes  of  unbelief,  struggles  and  pants  to  be  free,  and  there  is  no  human  help — nothing 
this  side  the  eternal  throne  on  which  reliance  can  be  placed  to  impart  the  light  which  is  needed. 
(6)  In  reference  to  duty.  The  mind  is  often  perplexed  to  know  what  should  be  done.  Though 
desirous  of  doing  what  is  right,  yet  there  may  be  so  many  conflicting  views;  there  may  be  such 
doubt  as  to  what  is  best  and  right,  that  none  but  God  can  direct  in  such  an  emergency,  (c)  In 
cases  of  peril.  Daniel  and  his  friends  were  in  danger;  and  men  are  often  now  in  such  danger 
that  they  feel  that  none  but  God  can  save  them.  On  a  bed  of  pain ;  in  a  stranded  vessel ;  in  a 
burning  house,  men  often  feel  that  human  help  is  powerless,  and  that  aid  can  be  found  in  none 
but  God.  Thus  the  church,  in  the  dark  days  of  persecution,  has  often  been  so  encompassed  with 
danger.s,  that  it  could  not  but  feel  that  none  but  God  could  avert  the  impending  destruction, 
(c)  In  times  when  religion  declines,  and  when  iniquity  abounds.  Then  the  church  often  is  led 
to  feel  that  there  is  need  of  the  aid  of  God,  and  that  none  but  he  cau  rouse  it  from  its  death- 
like slumbers,  and  put  back  the  swelling  waves  of  iniquity.  II.  In  such  circumstances  it  is  the 
privilege  of  a  good  man  to  appeal  to  God,  with  the  hope  that  he  will  interpose.  (1.)  This  was 
felt  by  Daniel,  and  it  is  an  undoubted  truth,  as  revealed  in  the  Bible,  that  in  such  circum- 
stances, if  we  will  look  to  God,  we  may  hope  for  his  guidance  and  help.  Comp.  2  Kings  xix. 
1-i,  15;  Job  xvi.  19-21;  Ps.  XXV.  9,  xlvi.  1,  Sfg.,  Iv.  22;  James  i.  5,  6.  But  (2.)  what  kind  of  inter- 
position and  direction  may  we  hope  for  in  such  perplexities?  I  answer:  (a)  We  may  expect  the 
divine  direction  by  a  careful  study  of  the  principles  laid  down  in  the  Scriptures.  The  Bible 
indeed  does  not,  for  it  could  not,  mention  the  names  of  individuals,  or  specify  every  case  which 
would  occur  in  which  divine  direction  would  be  needed,  but  it  lays  down  great princijyU's  of 
truth,  applicable  to  all  the  circumstances  which  will  ever  arise.  In  this  respect  there  is  a  won- 
derful richness  and  fullness  in  the  Word  of  God.  There  is  many  a  rich  vein  of  truth  which  seems 
never  to  have  been  worked  until  we  are  placed  in  some  new  and  untried  situation.  AVhen  one  la 
thrown  into  perplexing  circumstances ;  when  he  is  called  to  pa.ss  through  trials;  when  he  mei  ts 
some  powerful  form  of  temptation,  he  is  surprised  to  find  how  much  there  is  in  the  Bible  adapted 
to  such  circumstances  that  he  never  saw  there  before.  It  seems  to  be  a  new  book,  written  to 
meet  just  such  cases ;  nor  in  such  circumstances  does  he  ever  consult  its  pages  in  vain,  (b)  We 
may  expect  direction  by  his  providence.  The  sparrow  falls  not  to  the  ground  without  his  direc- 
tion, and  all  events  are  under  his  control,  and  as  these  events  occur  they  may  bo  regarded  as 
so  many  indications  of  his  will.  One  of  the  most  interesting  and  profitable  emploj'ments  in  a 
man's  life  is  to  study  the  indications  of  Providence  in  regard  to  himself,  and  to  endeavour  to 
learn,  from  what  is  daily  occurring  to  him,  what  is  the  will  of  God  in  regard  to  him.  A  careful 
and  prayerful  observer  of  the  intimations  of  the  divine  will  is  not  in  serious  danger  of  error. 
(c)  God  guides  those  who  are  in  perplexity  by  his  Spirit.  There  is  a  secret  and  silent  influ- 
ence on  the  mind  of  him  who  is  desirous  of  being  led  in  the  way  of  duty,  suggesting  what  is 
true,  delivering  the  mind  from  prejudice,  overcoming  opposition  to  the  truth,  disposing  the 
heart  to  charity,  peace,  and  love,  prompting  to  the  performance  of  dutj',  and  gradually  elevating 
the  soul  to  God.  If  a  man  would  pray  when  he  feels  an  inward  prompting  to  pray ;  would  read 
tho  Bibl«  when  some  inward  voice  scorns  to  call  him  to  do  it ;  would  do  good  when  the  inward 


168  DANIEL.  [B.C.  603. 

monitor  urges  him  to  do  it;  wodld  fix  tho  eye  and  the  heart  on  heaven  when  something  within 
seems  to  pad  liim  toward  the;  skies,  ho  would  not  be  in  much  dancror  of  error.  Such  are 
'  spring-ti  Jies  of  piety  in  the  soul' — times  when  the  soul  may  make  rapid  progress  in  the  know- 
ledge of  the  trutli,  and  it  is  not  enthusiasm  to  say  that  such  states  of  mind  are  produced  by 
an  influence  from  above. 

(4.)  In  view  of  this  chapter  (v.s.  17,  IS),  wo  may  observe  that  it  is  a  privilege  to  have  praying 
friends — friends  on  whom  we  can  call  to  unite  with  us  in  prayer  in  the  time  of  trouble.  So 
Daniel  found  it  when  Ac  called  on  his  friends  to  pray  ;  so  Estiier  found  it  when  lier  whole  peoplo 
were  in  danger,  and  when  all  depended  on  her  successful  application  to  the  sovereign  (Esther 
iv.  Ill),  and  so  the  friends  of  God  have  found  it  in  all  ages.  If  prayer  is  heard  at  all,  there  are 
special  reasons  why  it  should  prevail  when  many  are  united  in  the  request.  Comp.  Matt. 
xviii.  19.  Hence  the  propriety  of  worship  in  the  family;  hence  the  fitness  of  prayer-meetings; 
and  hence  the  appropriateness  of  prayer  offered  in  the  great  congregation. 

(5.)  God  should  be  praised  and  acknowledged  as  having  supremacy  over  all  things,  vs.  20-23. 
Particularly  he  sliould  be  acknowledged  (a)  in  the  changes  that  occur  on  earth;  in  the  changes 
from  childhood  to  youth,  and  from  youth  to  manhood,  and  to  old  age;  in  the  beautiful  changes 
of  the  seasons,  and  in  all  the  variety  which  tlie  seasons  bring  with  them;  in  the  changes  from 
sickness  to  health,  from  poverty  to  affluence,  from  oppression  and  slavery  to  freedom,  from  an 
humble  to  an  exalted  condition ;  in  all  the  revolutions  of  empire,  and  the  changes  of  dynasties. 
{b)  He  should  bo  acknowledged  in  his  supremacy  over  the  kings  and  rulers  of  the  earth.  Every 
monarch  reigns  by  his  permission,  and  every  one  is  designed  to  accomplish  some  groat  purpose  in 
the  development  of  his  plans.  If  a  full  and  correct  history  of  the  world  could  be  written,  it  would 
be  found  that  God  had  so7ne  object  to  accomplish  by  the  instrumentality  of  every  one  whom  he  has 
called  to  a  throne,  and  that  as  we  can  now  see  a  distinct  design  to  be  accomplished  by  the  reign 
of  Pharaoh,  Sennacherib,  Cyrus,  and  Augustus,  so  we  could  find  some  distinct  design  in  re- 
ference to  every  one  who  has  ever  reigned,  (c)  He  should  be  recognized  as  the  source  of  all 
knowledge.  Particularly  (1.)  he  originally  endowed  every  mind,  and  gave  it  the  capacity  which 
it  has  for  acquiring  knowledge ;  (2.)  he  preserves  the  faculties  of  the  mind,  and  gives  them  their 
just  balance;  (.3.)  he  makes  the  intellect  clear  and  bright,  and  wlien  it  applies  itself  to  the 
investigation  of  truth  he  only  can  preserve  it  unclouded ;  (4)  he  makes,  under  the  operation 
of  the  regular  laws  of  intellect,  important  suugestions  to  the  mind  —  those  pregnant  hints  con- 
taining so  much  ••  the  seeds  of  things"'  on  which  all  truj  progress  in  knowledge  depends — those 
bright  thoughts,  those  happy  conceptions,  which  come  into  the  soul,  and  wliich  result  in  such 
happy  inventions,  and  such  advances  in  science,  art,  literature,  and  law ;  and  (5.)  he  should 
be  regarded  as  the  original  source  of  those  inventions  which  contribute  so  much  to  the  progress 
of  the  race.  At  the  proper  time,  and  the  best  time,  when  some  new  and  wonderful  discovery 
is  to  burst  upon  the  world,  he  raises  up  the  individual  who  is  to  make  it,  and  the  discovery 
takes  its  place  as  one  of  the  fixed  points  of  progress,  and  society,  with  that  as  a  treasure  never 
to  be  lost,  moves  forward  on  a  higher  elevation,  with  greatly  accelerated  progress.  So  it  was 
with  the  invention  of  alphabetical  writing;  the  art  of  printing;  the  application  of  steam  to  pur- 
poses of  manufactory  and  navigation  ;  the  telescope,  and  the  telegraph ;  and,  in  general,  in  re- 
spect to  all  those  great  inventions  which  have  contributed  to  the  progress  of  society.  If  the 
whole  truth  were  known,  it  would  be  seen  that  the  hand  of  God  was  in  these  things  as  really  as 
in  the  '  revelation  of  the  deep  and  secret  things  to  Daniel.' 

(6.)  We  may  learn  from  this  chapter,  as  was  remarked  in  the  Notes  on  ver.  30,  that  for  all 
"ur  attainments  in  knowledge  and  wisdom  we  should  ascribe  the  praise  to  God  alone.  In  ilhis- 
tration  of  this  we  may  rem.ark  (I.),  Tliat  there  is  a  strong  native  tendency  in  man  to  ascribe 
the  honour  of  such  attainments  to  himself.  It  is  one  of  the  most  difficult  of  all  things  to 
induce  man  to  attribute  the  praise  of  whatever  excellence  he  may  have,  or  whatever  attain- 
ments he  may  make,  to  his  Creator.  This  exists  universally  in  regard  to  talent,  rank,  and  scientifio 
attainments;  and  it  is  even  liard  for  a  heart  that  is  endowed  with  true  religion  to  free 
itself  altogether  from  self-glorying,  as  if  it  were  all  to  be  traced  to  ourselves.  Vet  (II.).  in  our 
case,  as  in  the  case  of  Daniel,  all  the  honour  should  be  ascribed  to  God.  For  (1.)  it  is  to  him  we 
owe  all  our  original  endowments  of  mind  and  of  body,  whatever  thej'  may  be.  In  this  respect 
we  are  as  he  chose  to  make  us.  ATe  have  no  natural  endowment — whether  of  beauty,  strength, 
genius,  aptness  for  learning,  or  advantages  for  distinction  in  science  which  he  did  not  confer 
on  us,  and  which  ho  could  not  as  easily  have  withheld  from  us  as  he  did  fi-om  those  less 
favoured.  And  why  should  we  be  proud  cf  these  things  ?  Shall  the  oak  of  Ba.-^han  be  proud 
of  its  far-spreading  arms,  or  its  strength?  Shall  the  cedar  of  Lebanon  be  proud  of  its  height, 
and  its  vastness,  and  its  beauty  ?  Shall  the  rose  be  proud  of  its  beauty  or  its  sweetness,  or  shall 
tho  magnolia  boast  of  its  fragrance?  (2.)  God  has  conferred  on  us  all  the  means  of  education 
whicli  we  have  enjoyed,  and  all  to  which  the  development  of  our  natural  powers  can  be  traced. 
He  has  preserved  our  reason  ;  he  has  furnished  us  instructors ;  he  has  provided  the  books  which 
we  have  read;  he  has  continued  to  us  the  possession  of  the  health  which  we  have  enjoyed.  At 
any  moment  ho  could  have  driven  reason  from  the  throne;  he  could  have  deprived  us  of 
health;  he  could  have  summoned  us  away.  (3.)  It  is  equally  owing  to  him  that  we  have  been 
favoured  with  any  success  in  the  prosecution  of  our  calling  in  life.  Let  the  merchant  who 
has  accumulated  great  property,  apparently  by  his  own  industry,  suppo.se  that  all  divine 
agency  and  influence  in  his  case  had  been  withheld,  and  whatever  labour  he  might  have 
expended,  or  with  whatever  skill  he  might  be  endowed,  he  could  have  met  with  no  such 
success.  Let  him  reflect  how  much  he  owes  to  favouring  gales  on  the  ocean ;  to  the  seasons 
producing  abundant  harvests,  and  to  what  seems  almost  to  be  chance  or  fortune,  and  he 


B.  C.  603.]  C  II A  P  T  E  R   1 1.  161 

will  see  at  once  that  whatever  success  he  may  have  heen  favoured  with  is  toxt-  v. seed,  in  an 
emiueat  sense,  to  God.  The  same  thing  is  true  of  all  the  other  successful  departments  of 
human  effort.  (4.)  This  is  equally  true  in  all  the  knowledge  which  we  have  of  tli«!  way  of  sal- 
vation, and  all  our  hopes  of  eternal  life.  It  is  a  great  principle  of  religion  that  '  we  have  nothing 
which  we  have  not  received,  and  that  if  we  have  received  it,  we  should  not  glory  as  if  we  had 
not  received  it,  for  it  is  God  who  makes  us  to  dilTer.'  1  Cor.  iv.  7.  It  is  God  wlio  originally  gavo 
us  the  volume  of  revealed  truth — making  us  ditfer  from  the  whole  pagan  world.  It  is  God  who 
av,'akened  us  to  see  our  guilt  and  danger,  making  us  to  differ  from  the  gay  and  careless  world 
iround  us.  It  is  God  alone  who  has  pardoned  our  sins,  making  us  to  differ  from  the  multitude 
who  arc  unpardoned  in  the  world.  It  is  God  who  has  given  us  every  hope  that  we  cherish  that 
is  well-founded,  and  all  the  peace  and  joy  which  we  have  had  in  communion  with  himself  For 
these  things,  therefore,  we  should  give  all  the  praise  to  God,  and  in  our  case,  as  in  that  of  Daniel, 
it  is  one  of  the  evidences  of  our  piety  when  we  are  disposed  to  do  so. 

(7.)  We  have  in  this  chapter  (vs.  46,  47,)  an  instructive  instance  of  the  extent  to  which  an 
Irreligious  man  may  go  in  showing  respect  for  God.  It  cannot  he  supposed  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
was  a  truly  pious  man.  His  characteristics  and  actions,  both  before  and  after  this,  were  those 
of  a  lie.athen,  and  there  is  no  evidence  that  he  was  truly  converted  to  God.  Yet  he  evinced  the 
ti'ghL'St  respect  for  one  who  was  a  servant  and  prophet  of  the  Most  High  (ver.  46),  and  even  for 
(lod  himself  (ver.  47).  This  was  evinced  in  a  still  more  remarkable  manner  at  a  subsequent 
■period,  ch.  iv.  In  this  he  showed  how  far  it  is  possible  for  one  to  go  who  has  no  real  piety,  and 
as  such  cases  are  not  uncommon,  it  may  not  be  improper  to  consider  them  for  a  moment. 
I.  This  respect  for  God  extends  to  the  following  things :  (1.)  An  admiration  of  him,  as  great, 
and  wise,  and  powerful.  The  evidences  of  his  power  and  wisdom  are  traced  in  his  works.  The 
mind  may  1 1;  impressed  with  that  which  is  wise,  or  overpowered  with  that  wliich  is  vast,  without 
there  being  any  real  religion,  and  all  this  admiration  may  terminate  on  God,  and  be  expressed 
in  language  of  respect  for  him.  or  for  his  ministers.  (2;)  This  admiration  of  God  may  be  ex- 
tended to  whatever  is  beautiful  in  religion.  The  beauty  of  the  works  of  nature,  of  the  skj-,  of  a 
landscape,  of  the  ocean,  of  the  setting  sun,  of  the  changing  clouds,  of  the  flowers  of  the  field, 
may  lead  the  thoughts  up  to  God,  and  produce  a  certain  admiration  of  a  Being  who  has  clothed 
the  world  with  so  much  loveliness.  There  is  a  religion  of  sentiment  as  well  as  of  principle; 
a  religion  that  terminates  on  the  beautiful  as  well  as  a  religion  that  terminates  on  the  Iwlt/. 
The  Greeks,  natural  admirers  of  beauty,  carried  this  kind  of  religion  to  the  highest  possible 
degree  ;  for  their  religion  was,  in  all  its  forms,  characterized  by  the  love  of  the  beautiful.  So 
also  there  is  much  that  is  beautiful  in  Christianit}',  as  well  as  in  the  works  of  God,  and  it  is  pos- 
sible to  be  charmed  with  that  without  ever  having  felt  any  compunction  for  sin,  or  any  love  for 
pure  religion  itself.  It  is  possible  for  one  who  has  a  natural  admiration  for  that  which  is  lovely 
in  character,  to  see  a  high  degree  of  moral  beauty  in  the  character  of  the  Redeemer;  for  ono 
whose  heart  is  easily  moved  by  sympathy  to  be  affected  in  view  of  the  sufferings  of  the  injured 
Saviour.  The  same  eyes  that  would  weep  over  a  well-told  tale,  or  over  a  tragic  representation 
on  the  stage,  or  over  a  scene  of  real  distress,  might  weep  over  the  wrongs  and  woes  of  Him  who 
was  crucified,  and  yet  there  might  be  nothing  more  than  the  religion  of  sentiment — the  religion 
springing  from  mere  natural  feeling.  (3.)  There  is  much  /jot^ic  religion  in  the  world.  It  is 
possible  for  the  imagination  to  form  such  a  view  of  the  divine  character  that  it  shall  seem  to  be 
lovely,  while  perhaps  there  may  be  .scarcely  a  feature  of  that  character  that  shall  be  correct. 
Not  a  little  of  the  religion  of  the  world  is  of  this  description — where  such  a  God  is  conceived 
of  as  the  mind  chooses,  and  the  affections  are  fixed  on  that  imaginary  being,  while  there  is  not 
a  particle  of  love  to  the  true  God  in  the  soul.  So  there  is  a  poetic  view  of  man,  of  his  character, 
of  his  destiny,  while  the  real  char.icter  of  the  heart  has  never  been  seen.  So  there  is  a  poetic 
view  of  heaven — strongly  resembling  ije  views  which  the  ancients  had  of  the  Elysian  fields. 
But  heaven  as  a  place  of  holiness,  has  never  been  thought  of,  and  would  not  be  loved.  Men 
look  forward  to  a  place  where  the  refined  and  the  intelligent;  the  amiable  and  the  lovely;  the 
accomplished  and  the  upright ;  where  poets,  orators,  warriors,  and  philosophers  will  be  assem. 
bled  together.  This  is  the  kind  of  religion  which  is  often  manifested  in  eulogies,  and  epitaphs, 
and  in  conversation,  where  those  who  never  had  any  better  religion,  and  never  pretended  to  any 
serious  piety,  are  represented  as  having  gone  to  heaven  when  they  die.  There  are  few  who, 
under  the  influence  of  such  a  religion,  are  not  looking  forward  to  some  kind  of  a  heaven ;  and 
few  persons  die,  whatever  may  be  their  character,  unless  they  are  openly  and  grossly  abandoned, 
for  whom  the  hope  is  not  expressed  that  they  have  gone  safe  to  a  better  world.  If  we  may 
credit  epitaphs,  and  obituary  notices,  and  funeral  eulogiums,  and  biographies,  there  are  few 
poets,  warriors,  statesmemor  philosophers,  about  whose  happiness  in  the  future  world  we  should 
have  any  apprehension.  II.  But  in  all  this  there  may  be  no  real  religion.  There  is  no  evi- 
dence that  there  was  any  in  the  case  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  as  little  is  there  in  the  instances 
now  referred  to.  Such  persons  may  have  a  kind  of  reverence  for  God  as  great,  and  powerful,  and 
wise;  they  mp.y  have  even  a  kind  of  pleasure  in  looking  on  the  evidence  of  his  existence  and 
1  erfections  in  his  works;  they  may  have  a  glow  of  pleasurable  emotion  in  the  raere poeiri/ 
(  f  religion ;  they  may  be  restrained  from  doing  many  things  by  their  consciences ;  they  may 
erect  temples,  and  build  altars,  and  contribute  to  the  support  of  religion,  and  even  be  zealous 
foi  »»ligion,  as  they  understand  it,  and  still  have  no  just  views  of  God,  and  no  true  piety  what- 
rvsr.  (1.)  The  mind  that  is  truly  religious  is  not  insensible  to  all  this,  and  may  have  aa 
exalted  notions  of  God  as  a  great  and  glorious  being,  and  be  as  much  impressed  with  the 
beauty  evinced  in  his  works  as  in  the  cases  supposed.  True  religion  does  not  destroy  the 
lease  of  the  sublime  and  beautiful,  but  rather  cultivates  this  in  a  higher  degree.  But  (2.)  theri« 
15 


170  DANIEL.  [B.C.  580. 

Is  much  besides  this  that  enters  into  true  religion,  and  -without  -which  all  these  things  are  rain, 
(a)  True  religion  always  arises  from  just  yiews  of  God  as  be  is  ;  not  from  him  as  an  imaginary 
being.  (6)  True  religion  must  regard  God  as  haying  moral  attributes;  as  benevolent,  and  just, 
and  true,  and  holy,  and  not  merely  as  powerful  and  great,  (c)  In  all  these  things  referred  to, 
there  is  necessarily  no  moral  excellence  on  the  part  of  those  who  thus  admire  God  and  his 
-works.  The  mere  admiration  of  power  implies  in  us  no  moral  excellence.  The  admiration 
of  the  wisdom  which  made  the  worlds  and  keeps  them  in  their  place ;  of  the  beauties  of  poetry, 
or  of  a  flower,  or  landscape,  though  made  by  God,  implies  no  moral  excellence  in  us,  and,  there- 
fore, no  true  religion.  There  is  no  more  religion  in  admiring  God  as  an  architect  or  painter 
than  there  is  in  admiring  Sir  Christopher  AVren,  or  Michael  Angelo;  and  the  mere  admiration 
of  the  works  of  God  as  such,  implies  no  more  moral  excellency  in  us  than  it  does  to  admire  St. 
Paul's  or  St.  Peter's.  lu  religion,  the  heart  docs  not  merely  admire  the  beautiful  and  the 
grand;  it  lores  th.it  which  is  pure,  and  just,  and  good,  and  holy.  It  delights  in  God  as  a  holy 
being  rather  than  as  a  powerful  being ;  it  finds  pleasure  in  his  moral  character,  and  not  merely 
In  his  ercatness. 

(8.)  "VVe  may  learn  from  this  chapter  (vcr.  49),  that  when  we  are  favoured  with  prosperity  and 
honour  -we  should  not  neglect,  or  be  ashamed  of,  the  companions  of  our  earlier  days,  and  tha 
partakers  of  our  fortune  when  we  were  poor  and  unknown.  Joseph,  when  exalted  to  the  pre- 
miership of  Kgypt,  was  not  ashamed  of  his  aged  fiither,  but,  though  he  had  been  an  bumble 
shepherd,  presented  him,  with  the  deepest  feelings  of  respect  towards  an  aged  parent,  to 
Pharaoh ;  nor  was  he  ashamed  of  his  brethren,  though  they  had  done  him  so  much  wrong. 
Daniel,  when  in  a  similar  m.anner  adv.anced  to  the  most  honourable  post  which  one  could 
reach,  in  the  most  magnificent  monarchy  of  the  -world,  -was  not  ashamed  of  the  j-outhful 
friends  with  whom  he  had  shared  the  humble  and  severe  lot  of  bondage.  So  we,  if  we  ar« 
made  rich;  if  we  are  raised  to  honour;  if  we  become  distinguished  for  learning  or  talent;  if 
our  names  are  known  abroad,  or  we  are  entrusted  with  a  high  and  honourable  office,  should 
not  fori:;et  the  friends  and  companions  cf  our  earlier  years. 


CHAPTER  III. 

§  1.      AUTHENTICITY  OF    THE    CHAPTER. 

The  objections  which  have  been  urged  against  the  authenticity  of  this  chapter,  are  mucli 
more  numerous  than  those  which  have  been  alleged  against  the  two  previous  chapters. 

I.  The  fir.st  which  deserves  to  be  noticed  is  stated  by  De  Wette  (p.  3S.3,  under  the  general  head 
of  improbabilities  in  the  ch,ipter),  and  Bleek,  p.  208,  as  quoted  by  Ilengstenberg,  die  Authentie 
des  Daniel,  p.  83.  The  objection  is,  substantially,  that  if  the  account  in  this  chapter  is  true,  it 
would  prove  that  the  Chaldeans  were  inclined  to  persecution  on  account  of  religious  opinions, 
which,  it  is  said,  is  contrary  to  their  whole  character  as  elsewhere  shown.  So  far  as  we  have 
any  information  in  regard  to  them,  it  is  alleged,  they  were  far  from  having  this  character,  and 
it  is  not  probable,  therefore,  that  Ncbuch.idnezzar  would  make  a  law  which  would  compel  the 
worship  of  an  idol  under  severe  pains  and  penalties. 

To  this  objection  the  following  reply  may  be  made: — 

(1.)  Little  is  known,  on  any  supposition,  of  the  Ch.ildeans  in  general,  and  little  of  the 
character  of  Nebuchadnezzar  in  particular,  beyond  what  we  find  in  the  Book  of  Daniel.  So 
far,  however,  as  we  have  any  knowledge  of  either  from  any  source,  there  is  no  inconsistency 
between  that  and  what  is  s.iid  in  this  chapter  to  have  occurred.  It  is  probable  that  no  one 
ever  perceived  any  incongruity  of  this  kind  in  the  book  itself,  nor,  if  this  were  all,  should 
we  suppose  that  there  was  any  improbability  in  the  account  in  this  chapter. 

(2.)  There  is  properly  no  account  of  jjerseciition  in  this  narrative,  nor  any  reason  to  suppose 
that  Nebuch.idnezzar  designed  any  such  thing.  This  is  admitted  by  Bertholdt  himself  (p.  261), 
and  is  manifest  on  the  face  of  the  whole  narrative.  It  is  indeed  stated  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
demanded,  on  severe  penalties,  a  recognition  of  the  god  that  he  worshipped,  and  required 
that  the  reverence  should  be  shown  to  that  god  which  he  thought  to  be  his  due.  It  is  true, 
also,  that  the  monarch  intended  to  be  obeyed  in  what  seems  to  u.s  to  be  a  very  arbitrary  and 
unreasonable  command,  that  they  should  'assemble  and  fall  down  and  worship  the  image 
which  he  had  set  up.  But  this  does  not  imply  any  disposition  to  persecute  on  account  of 
religion,  or  to  prevent  in  others  the  free  exercise  of  their  own  religious  opinions,  or  the  wor- 
ship of  their  own  gods.  It  is  well  known  that  it  was  a  doctrine  of  all  ancient  idolaters,  that 
respect  might  be  shown  to  foreign  gods — to  the  gods  of  other  people — without  in  the  least 
degree  implying  a  want  of  respect  for  their  own  gods,  or  violating  any  of  their  obligations  to 
them.  The  universal  maxim  was,  that  the  gods  of  all  nations  were  to  bs  respected,  and 
Ucuce  foreign  gods  might  be  introduced  ff>r  worship,  and   respect  paid   to   them  without  Ja 


B.C.  580.J  CHAPTER  III.  171 

any  degree  detracting  from  the  honour  -which  was  due  to  tlieir  own.  Nchuchadnczzar,  thcr» 
foro,  simply  demanded  that  homage  should  be  shown  to  the  idol  that  }ie  had  erected;  that  the 
god  whom  he  worshipped  should  be  acknowledged  as  a  god;  and  that  respect  should  thus  be 
shown  to  himself,  and  to  the  laws  of  his  empire,  by  acknowledging  his  god,  and  rendering  to 
that  god  the  degree  of  homage  which  was  his  due.  But  it  is  nowhere  intimated  that  he  re- 
garded his  idol  as  the  only  true  god,  or  that  he  demanded  that  he  should  be  recognized  na 
Buch,  or  that  he  was  not  willing  that  all  other  gods,  in  their  place,  should  be  honoured. 
Xhcre  is  no  intimation,  therefore,  that  he  meant  to  persecute  any  other  one  for  worshipping 
their  own  gods,  nor  is  there  any  reason  to  suppose  that  he  apprehended  that  there  would  be 
any  scruples  on  religious  grounds  about  acknowledging  the  image  that  he  set  up  to  be  worthy 
of  adoration  and  praise. 

(3.)  There  is  no  reason  to  think  that  he  wa.i  so  well  acquainted  with  the  peculiar  character 
of  the  Hebrew  religion  as  to  suppose  that  its  votaries  would  have  any  difficulty  on  this  sub- 
ject, or  would  hesitate  to  \inite  with  others  in  adoring  his  image.  lie  knew,  indeed,  that 
they  were  worshippers  of  Jehovah ;  that  they  had  reared  a  magnificent  temple  to  his  honour 
in  Jerusalem,  and  that  they  professed  to  keep  his  laws.  But  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that 
he  was  very  intimately  acquainted  with  the  laws  and  institutions  of  the  Hebrews,  or  that  he 
supposed  that  they  would  have  any  difficulty  in  doing  what  was  universally  understood  to  be 
proper — to  show  due  respect  to  the  gods  of  other  nations.  Certainly,  if  he  had  intimately 
known  the  history  of  a  considerable  portion  of  the  Hebrew  people,  and  been  acquainted  with 
their  proneness  to  fall  into  idolatry,  he  would  have  seen  little  to  make  him  doubt  that  they 
would  readily  comply  with  a  command  to  show  respect  to  the  gods  worshipped  in  other  lands. 
There  is  no  reason,  therefore,  to  suppose  that  he  anticipated  that  the  Hebrew  exiles,  any 
more  than  any  other  people,  would  hesitate  to  show  to  his  image  the  homage  which  he 
required. 

(■i.)  The  whole  account  agrees  well  with  the  character  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  IIo  was  an 
arbitrary  monarch.  He  was  accustomed  to  implicit  obedience.  He  was  determiued  in  his 
character,  and  resolute  in  his  purposes.  Having  once  formed  the  resolution  to  erect  such  a 
magnificent  image  of  his  god — one  that  would  correspond  with  the  greatness  of  his  capital, 
and,  at  the  same  time,  show  his  respect  for  the  god  that  he  worshipped, — nothing  was  more 
natural  than  that  he  should  issue  such  a  proclamation  that  homage  should  be  shown  to  it  by 
nil  his  subjects,  and  that,  in  order  to  secure  this,  he  should  issue  this  decree,  that  whoever  did 
not  do  it  should  be  punished  in  the  severest  manner.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  he 
had  any  particular  class  of  persons  in  his  eye,  or,  indeed,  that  he  anticipated  that  the  order 
would  be  disobeyed  by  any  class  of  persons.  In  fact  we  see  in  this  whole  transaction  just  one 
illustration  of  what  usually  occurred  under  the  arbitrary  despotisms  of  the  East,  where, 
whatever  is  the  order  that  is  issued  from  the  throne,  universal  and  absolute  submission  is 
demanded,  under  the  threatening  of  a  speedy  and  fearful  punishment.  The  order  of  NebU" 
chadnezzar  was  not  more  arbitrary  and  unreasonable  than  those  which  have  been  frequently 
issued  by  the  Turkish  Sultan. 

II.  A  second  objection  to  the  chapter,  is  the  account  of  the  musical  instruments  in  ver.  5. 
Ihe  objection  is,  that  to  some  of  these  instruments  Grecian  names  are  given,  and  that  this 
proves  that  the  transaction  must  have  a  later  date  than  is  attributed  to  it,  or  that  the  account 
must  have  been  written  by  one  of  later  times.  The  objection  is,  that  the  whole  statement 
Beems  to  have  been  derived  from  the  account  of  some  Greek  procession  in  honour  of  the  gods 
of  Greece.     See  Bleek,  p.  259. 

To  this  objection,  it  may  be  replied,  (a)  that  such  processions  in  honour  of  the  gods,  or  such 
assemblages,  accompanied  with  musical  instruments,  were,  and  are,  common  among  all  people. 
They  occur  constantly  at  the  East,  and  it  cannot,  with  any  propriety,  be  said  that  one  is  bor- 
rowed from  another,  (b)  A  large  part  of  these  instruments  have  undoubtedly  Chaldee  names 
given  to  them,  and  the  names  are  such  as  we  may  suppose  that  one  living  in  the  times  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  would  give  them.  See  Notes  on  ver.  5.  (c)  As  to  those  which  are  alleged  to 
Indicate  a  Greek  origin,  it  may  be  observed,  that  it  is  quite  uncertain  whether  the  origin  of 
the  name  was  Greek  or  Chaldee.  That  such  names  are  found  given  to  instruments  of  music 
by  the  Greeks,  is  certain  ;  but  it  is  not  certain  whence  they  obtained  the  name.  For  anything 
that  can  be  proved  to  the  contrary,  the  name  may  have  bad  an  Eastern  origin.  It  is  altogether 
probable  that  many  of  the  names  of  things  among  the  Greeks  had  such  an  origin  ;  and  if  the 
instrument  of  music  itself — as  no  one  can  prove  it  did  not — came  in  from  the  East,  the  name 
came  also  from  the  East,  (d)  It  may  be  further  stated,  that,  even  on  the  supposition  that 
the  name  had  its  origin  in  Greece,  there  is  no  absolute  certainty  that  the  name  and  the  instru- 
ment were  unknown  to  the  Chaldeans.  Who  can  prove  that  some  Chaldean  may  not  have 
been  in  Greece,  and  may  not  have  borne  back  to  his  own  country  some  instrument  of  music 
that  he  found  there  different  from  those  which  he  h.ad  been  accustomed  to  at  home,  or  that  he 
may  not  have  constructed  an  instrument  resembling  one  which  he  had  seen  there,  and  given 
it  the  .same  name?  Or  who  can  prove  that  some  strolling  Greek  musician  may  not  have 
travelled  as  far  as  Babjion — for  the  Greeks  travelled  everywhere — and  carried  with  him  .some 
Instrument  of  music  before  unknown  to  the  Chaldeans,  and  imparted  to  them  at  the  same  time 
the  knowledge  of  the  instrument  and  the  name?  But  until  this  is  shown  the  objection  has 
CO  force. 

III.  A  third  objection  is,  that  the  statement  in  ver.  22,  that  the  persons  appointed  to  ezecnte 
the  orders  of  the  king  died  from  the  heat  of  the  furnace,  or  that  the  king  issued  an  order 


i72  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  580. 

to  pxecwte  which  perilled  the  lives  of  the  innocent  who  were  intrusted  with  its  execution,  is 

improbable. 

To  this  it  may  be  said  (a),  that  there  is  no  evidence  or  affirmation  that  the  king  contemplated 
their  danper,  or  desi;;ned  to  peril  their  lives ;  but  it  is  undoubtedly  a  fact  that  he  was  intent  oa 
the  execution  of  his  own  order,  and  that  he  little  regarded  the  peril  of  those  who  executed  it. 
And  nothing  is  more  probable  than  this;  and,  indeed,  nothing  more  common.  A  general  who 
orders  a  company  of  men  to  silence  or  take  a  battery,  has  no  malice  against  them,  and  no 
design  on  their  lives  ;  but  he  is  intent  on  the  accomplishment  of  the  object,  whatever  may  be 
the  peril  of  the  men,  or  however  large  a  portion  of  them  may  fall.  In  fact,  the  objection  which 
is  here  made  to  the  credibility  of  this  narrative  is  an  objection  which  would  be  with  erjual  force 
against  most  of  the  orders  issued  in  battle,  and  not  a  few  of  the  commands  issued  by  arbitrary 
monarchs  in  time  of  peace.  The  fact  in  this  case  was,  the  king  was  intent  on  the  execution  of 
his  purpose — the  punishment  of  the  refractory  and  stubborn  men  who  had  resisted  his  com- 
mands, and  there  is  no  probability  that,  in  the  excitements  of  wrath,  he  would  pause  to  inquire 
whether  the  execution  of  his  purpose  would  endanger  the  lives  of  those  who  were  entrusted 
with  the  execution  of  the  order  or  not.  (b)  There  is  every  probability  that  the  heat  would  he 
Eo  great  as  to  peril  the  lives  of  those  who  should  approach  it.  It  is  said  to  have  been  made 
seven  times  hotter  than  usual  (ver.  10) ;  that  is,  as  hot  as  it  could  be  made,  and,  if  this  were  so, 
it  is  by  no  means  an  unreasonable  supposition  that  those  who  v.ere  compelled  to  approach  it  so 
near  as  to  cast  others  in  should  be  in  danger. 

IV.  A  fourth  objection,  urged  by  Griesinger,  p.  41,  as  quoted  by  Ilengstenberg,  Authentie  dea 
Daniel,  p.  92,  is,  that  '  as  Nebuchadnezzar  had  the  furnace  already  prepared  ready  to  throw 
these  men  in,  he  must  have  known  beforehand  that  they  would  not  comply  with  his  demand, 
>nd  so  must  have  designed  to  punish  them  :  or  that  this  representation  is  a  mere  fiction  of  the 
(vriter,  to  make  the  delivery  of  these  men  appear  more  marvellous.' 

To  this  it  may  bo  replied  (a),  that  there  is  not  the  slightest  evidence,  from  the  account  in 
Daniel,  that  Nebuchadnezzar  had  the  furnace  prepared  beforehand,  as  if  it  were  expected  that 
some  would  disobey,  and  as  if  he  meant  to  show  his  wrath.  He  indeed  (ver.  6)  threatens  this 
punishment,  but  it  is  clear,  from  ver.  19,  that  the  furnace  was  not  yet  heated  up,  and  that  the 
Kcasion  of  its  being  heated  in  such  a  manner  was  the  unexpected  refusal  of  these  three  men  to 
obey  him.  {b)  But  if  it  should  be  admitted  that  there  was  a  furnace  thus  glowing — heated 
irith  a  view  to  punish  offenders — it  would  not  be  contrary  to  what  sometimes  occurs  in  the 
East  under  a  despotism.  Sir  John  Chardin  (Voy.  en  I'erse.  iv.  p.  27C),  mentions  in  his  time  (ia 
the  seventeenth  century),  a  case  similar  to  this.  He  says  that  during  a  whole  month,  in  a 
time  of  great  scarcity,  an  oven  was  kept  heated  to  throw  in  all  persons  who  had  failed  to  comply 
with  the  laws  in  regard  to  taxation,  and  had  thus  defrauded  the  government.  This  was,  in 
fact,  strictly  in  accordance  with  the  character  of  Oriental  despotism.  We  know,  moreover,  from 
Jer.  xxix.  2'2,  that  this  mode  of  punishment  was  not  unknown  in  Babylon,  and  it  would  seem 
probable  that  it  was  not  uncommon  in  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  Thus  Jeremiah  says, 
"  And  of  them  shall  be  taken  up  a  curse  by  all  the  captivity  of  Judah  which  are  in  Babylon, 
saying.  The  Lord  make  thee  like  Zedekiah  and  like  Ahab,  whom  the  king  of  Babylon  roasted 
in  the  fire." 

V.  A  fifth  objection  is  stated  thus  by  Bertholdt :  '  Why  did  the  wonders  recorded  in  this 
chapter  take  place?  It  was  only  for  this  purpose  that  Nebuchadnezzar  might  be  made  to 
api)ear  to  give  praise  to  God,  that  he  is  represented  as  giving  commandment  that  no  one  should 
reproach  him.  But  this  object  is  too  small  to  justify  such  an  array  of  means.'  To  this  it  may 
be  replied  (a)  that  it  does  not  appear  from  the  chapter  that  this  was  the  object  aimed  at. 
{b)  There  were  other  designs  in  the  narrative  beside  this.  They  were  to  show  the  firmness  of 
the  men  who  refu.sed  to  worship  an  idol-god ;  to  illustrate  their  conscientious  adherence  to 
their  religion;  to  show  their  confidence  in  the  divine  protection;  to  prove  that  God  will  defend 
those  who  put  their  trust  in  him,  and  that  he  can  deliver  them  even  in  the  midst  of  the 
flames.     These  things  were  worthy  of  record. 

VI.  It  has  been  objected  that  'the  expression  in  which  Nebuchadnezzar  (ver.  2S),  is  repro- 
sented  as  breaking  out,  after  the  rescue  of  the  three  men,  is  altogether  contrary  to  his  dignity, 
and  to  the  respect  for  the  religion  of  his  fathers  and  of  his  country,  which  he  was  bound  to 
defend.'  Bertholdt,  p.  253.  But  to  this  it  may  be  replied  (a)  that  if  this  scene  actually  oc- 
curred before  the  eyes  of  the  king — if  God  had  thus  miraculou.sly  interposed  in  delivering  hia 
servants  in  this  wonderful  manner  from  the  heated  furnace,  nothing  would  be  more  natural 
than  this.  It  was  a  manifest  miracle,  a  direct  interposition  of  God,  a  deliverance  of  the  pro- 
fessed friends  of  Jehovah  by  a  power  that  was  above  all  that  was  human,  and  an  expression 
of  surprise  and  admiration  was  in  every  way  proper  on  such  an  occasion.  (6)  It  accorded  with 
all  the  prevailing  notions  of  religion,  and  of  the  respect  due  to  the  gods,  to  say  this.  As  above 
remarked,  it  was  a  principle  recognized  among  the  heathen  to  honour  the  gods  of  other  nations, 
and  if  they  had  interposed  to  defend  tiieir  own  votaries,  it  was  no  more  than  was  admitted 
in  all  the  nations  of  idolatry.  If,  therefore,  Jehovah  had  interposed  to  save  his  own  friends 
and  worshippers,  every  principle  which  Nebuchadnezzar  held  on  the  .subject  would  make  it 
proper  for  him  to  acknowledge  the  fact,  and  to  say  that  honour  was  due  to  him  for  his  inter- 
position. In  this,  moreover,  Nebuchadnezzar  would  be  understood  as  saying  nothing  derog- 
atory to  the  g0(.ls  that  he  himself  worshipped,  or  to  those  adored  in  his  own  land.  All  that 
is  necessary  to  be  supposed  in  what  he  said  is,  that  he  now  felt  that  Jehovah,  the  God  whom 
the  Hebrews  adored,  had  shown  that  he  was  worthy  to  be  ranked  among  the  gods,  and  that 
in  common  with  others,  he  had  power  to  protect  his  own  friends.    To  this  it  maj  be  added 


B  C.  580.]  CHAPTER   III.  173 

(f)  that,  in  his  way,  Nebuchadnezzar  everywhere  showed  that  ho  was  a  rdiginus  man:  that  is, 
that  lie  recognized  the  gods,  and  was  ever  ready  to  acknowledge  their  intorforence  in  human 
airairs,  and  to  render  them  the  honour  which  was  their  due.  Indeed,  this  whole  affair  grew 
out  of  his  respect  for  religinn.  and  what  here  occurred  was  only  in  accordance  witli  his  general 
principle,  that  when  any  God  had  shown  that  he  had  power  to  deliver  his  peo|)lo.  he  should  he 
acknowledged,  and  that  no  words  of  reproach  should  be  uttered  against  him,  ver.  29. 

VII.  A  more  plausible  objection  than  tho.se  which  have  just  been  noticed  is  urged  by  LUder- 
wald,  Jalin,  and  Deresor,  in  regard  to  the  account  which  is  given  of  the  image  which  Nebuchad- 
nezzar is  said  to  have  erected.  This  objection  has  reference  to  the  si>t  if  the  image,  to  its 
proportions,  and  to  tho  material  of  which  it  is  said  to  have  been  compose:..  This  objection,  as 
stated  by  Berl  holdt  (p.  250),  is  substantially  the  following :  '  that  the  image  had  probablj-  a  human 
form,  and  yet  that  the  proportions  of  the  human  figure  are  by  no  means  observed — the  lieiglit 
being  represented  to  have  been  sixty  cubits,  and  its  breadth  six  cubits — or  its  heighth  being  to 
its  breadth  as  ten  to  one,  whereas  the  proportion  of  a  man  is  only  six  to  one;  that  the  amount 
of  gold  in  such  an  image  is  incredible,  being  beyond  any  means  which  the  king  of  Babylon 
could  have  possessed  ;  and  that  probably  the  image  hero  referred  to  was  one  that  Herodotus 
says  he  saw  in  the  temple  of  Belus  of  Babylon  (I.  183),  and  whicli  Diodorus  Siculus  describes 
(II.  9),  and  which  was  only  forty  feet  in  height.'  See  Notes  ou  ver.  1.  In  regard  to  this 
objection,  we  may  observe,  then. 

(a)  That  ther('  is  no  certainty  that  this  was  the  same  Image  which  is  referred  to  by  Herodotus 
and  Diodorus  Siculus.  That  imago  was  in  tho  temple ;  this  was  erected  on  the  '  plain  of  Dura.' 
See  Notes  on  ver.  1.  But  so  far  as  appears,  this  may  have  been  erected  for  a  temporary  pur- 
pose, and  the  materials  may  then  have  been  employed  for  other  pvirposes ;  that  in  the  temple 
was  permanent. 

(h)  As  to  the  amount  of  gold  in  the  imago — it  is  not  said  or  implied  that  it  was  of  solid  gold. 
It  is  well  known  that  the  images  of  the  gods  were  made  of  wood  or  clay,  and  overlaid  with  gold 
or  silver,  and  this  is  all  that  is  necessarily  implied  here.     See  Notes  on  ver.  1. 

(c)  The  lieir/lit  of  the  alleged  image  can  be  no  real  objection  to  the  statement.  It  is  not  neces- 
sary to  assume  that  it  had  the  human  form — though  that  is  probable — but  if  that  be  admitted, 
there  can  be  no  objection  to  the  supposition  that,  eitiier  standing  by  itself,  or  raised  on  a 
pedestal,  it  may  have  been  as  lofty  as  the  statement  here  implies.  Tlie  colossal  figure  atEIiodes 
was  an  hundred  and  five  Grecian  feet  in  height,  and,  being  made  to  stride  the  mouth  of  the 
harbour,  was  a  work  of  much  more  difficult  constrvictioa  than  this  figure  would  have  been. 

(d)  As  to  the  alleged  disprnpnrtion  in  the  figure  of  the  image,  see  Notes  ou  ver.  1.  To  what 
is  there  said  may  be  aildcd:  (1)  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  it  had  the  human  form. 
Nothing  of  this  kind  is  affirmed,  thongli  it  may  be  regarded  as  probable.  But  if  it  had  not,  of 
course  tlie  objection  would  have  no  force.  (2)  If  it  had  the  human  form,  it  is  by  no  means 
clear  whtther  it  had  a  sitting  or  a  standing  posture.  Nothing  is  said  on  this  point  in  regard  to 
the  image  or  statue,  and  until  this  is  determined,  nothing  can  be  said  properly  respecting  the 
proportions.  (3)  It  is  not  said  whether  it  stood  by  itself,  or  whether  4t  rested  on  a  basis  or 
pediment— and  until  this  is  determined,  no  objections  can  be  valid  as  to  the  proportion  of  the 
statue.  It  is  every  way  probable  that  the  image  was  reared  on  a  lofty  pedestal,  and  for  any- 
thing that  appears,  the  proportions  of  the  image  itself,  whether  sitting  or  standing,  may  have 
been  well  preserved.  But  (4)  in  addition  to  this  it  should  be  said,  that  if  the  account  here  is  to 
be  taken  literally  as  stating  that  the  image  was  ten  times  as  high  as  it  was  broad — thus  failing 
to  observe  the  proper  human  proportions — the  account  would  not  be  incredible.  It  is  admitted 
by  Gesenius  (Ency.  von  Ersch.  und  Gruber,  art.  Babylon,  Th.  vii.  p.  21),  that  the  Babylonians 
had  no  correct  taste  in  these  matters.  'The  ruins,' says  he,  '  are  imposing  by  their  colossal 
greatness,  not  by  their  beauty ;  all  the  ornaments  are  rough  and  barbarian.'  The  Babylonians, 
indeed,  possessed  a  taste  for  the  colossal,  the  grand,  the  imposing,  but  they  also  liad  a  taste  for 
the  monstrous  and  the  prodigious,  and  a  mere  want  of  proportion  is  not  a  sufliicient  argument 
to  prove  that  what  is  stated  here  did  not  occur. 

YIII.  But  one  other  objection  remains  to  be  noticed.  It  is  one  which  is  noticed  by  Bertboldt 
(pp.  251,  252),  that,  if  this  is  a  true  account,  it  is  strange  that  Daniel  liimself  is  not  referred  to; 
that  if  he  was,  according  to  the  representation  in  the  last  chapter,  a  high  officer  at  court,  it  is 
unaccountable  that  he  is  not  mentioned  as  concerned  in  these  aflairs,  and  especially  that  he  did 
not  interpose  in  belialf  of  his  three  friends  to  save  tliem.  To  this  objection  it  is  sufficient  to  reply 
(a)  that,  as  Bertholdt  himself  (p.  287)  suggests,  Daniel  may  have  been  absent  from  the  capital 
at  this  time  on  some  business  of  state,  and  consequently  the  question  whether  he  would  wor- 
ship the  image  may  not  have  been  tested.  It  is  probable,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  that  he 
would  be  employed  on  such  embassies,  or  be  sent  to  some  other  part  of  the  empire  from  time 
to  time,  to  arrange  the  affairs  of  the  provinces,  and  no  one  can  demonstrate  that  he  was  not 
absent  on  this  occasion.  Indeed,  the  fact  that  he  is  not  mentioned  at  all  in  the  transaction 
would  serve  to  imply  this,  since  he  was  at  court  it  is  to  be  presumed  that  he  himself  would 
have  been  implicated  as  well  as  his  three  friends.  Comp.  ch.  vi.  lie  was  not  a  man  to 
shrink  from  duty,  or  to  decline  any  proper  method  of  showing  his  attachment  to  the  reli- 
gion of  his  fathers,  or  any  proper  interest  in  the  welfare  of  his  friends.  But  (/>)  it  is  possiblo 
that  even  if  Daniel  were  at  court  at  that  time,  and  did  not  unite  in  the  worship  of  the  image, 
he  might  have  escaped  the  danger.  There  were  undoubtedly  many  more  Jews  in  the  province 
of  Babylon  who  did  not  worship  this  image,  but  no  formal  accusation  was  brought  against 
liim,  and  tlieir  case  did  not  come  befo^e  the  king.  For  some  reason,  the  accusation  was  made 
specific  againiit  these  three  men— /or  they  were  riders  in  the  province  (ch.  ii.  49),  and  being  to- 
15* 


174 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  580 


reigners,  ihc  people  under  tliem  may  have  gladly  seized  the  occasion  to  complain  of  them  to  th« 
king.  But  so  little  is  known  of  the  circumstance?,  that  it  is  not  possible  to  determine  the  mat tef 
with  certainty.  All  that  ncc<ls  to  bo  said  is,  that  the  fact  that  Daniel  was  7iot  implicated  in  th« 
affair,  is  no  proof  that  the  three  persons  referred  to  were  not;  that  it  is  no  evidence  that  what 
is  said  otthem  is  not  true  because  nothing  is  said  of  Daniel. 


g  2.   ANALYSIS   OF   THE   CHAPTER. 

Tnis  chapter,  which  is  complete  in  itself,  or  which  embraces  the  entire  narrative  relating  to 
an  important  transaction,  contains  the  account  of  a  magnificent  brazen  image  erected  by  Ne- 
buchadnezzar, and  the  result  of  attempting  to  constrain  the  conscientious  Hebrews  to  worship 
it.     The  narrative  comprises  the  following  points  : 

I.  The  erection  of  the  great  image  in  the  plain  of  Dura,  vor.  1. 

II.  The  dedication  of  the  image  in  the  presence  of  the  great  princes  and  governors  of  the 
provinces,  the  high  officers  of  state,  and  an  Immense  multitude  of  the  people,  accompanied  with 
solemn  music,  vs.  2 — T. 

III.  The  complaint  of  certain  Chaldeans  respecting  the  Jews,  that  they  refused  to  render 
homage  to  the  image,  reminding  the  king  that  he  had  solemnly  enjoined  this  on  all  persons,  on 
penalty  of  being  cast  into  a  burning  furnace  in  case  of  disobedience,  vs.  8 — 12.  This  charge 
was  brought  particularly  against  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego.  Daniel  escaped  the  accu- 
sation, for  reasons  which  will  be  stated  in  the  Notes  on  ver.  12.  The  common  people  of  the 
Jews  also  escaped,  as  the  command  extended  particularly  to  the  rulers. 

IV.  The  manner  in  which  Nebuchadnezzar  received  this  accusation,  vs.  13 — 15.  He  was  filled 
with  rage ;  he  summoned  the  accused  into  his  presence ;  he  commanded  them  to  prostrate  them- 
selves before  tlie  image  on  penalty  of  being  cast  at  once  into  the  fiery  furnace. 

V.  The  noble  answer  of  the  accused,  vs.  16 — 18.  They  stated  to  the  king  that  his  threat  did 
not  alarm  them,  and  that  they  felt  no  solicitude  to  answer  him  in  regard  to  the  matter  (v.  16)  ; 
that  they  were  assured  that  the  God  whom  they  served  was  able  to  deliver  them  from  the  fur- 
nace, and  from  the  wrath  of  the  king  (ver.  17);  Ijut  that  even  if  he  did  not,  whatever  might  be 
the  issue,  they  could  not  serve  the  gods  of  the  Chaldeans,  nor  worship  the  image  which  the 
king  had  set  up. 

TI.  The  infliction  of  the  threatened  punishment,  vs.  19 — 2.3.  The  furnace  was  commanded 
to  be  heated  seven  times  hotter  than  usual;  they  were  bound  and  thrown  in  with  their  usual 
apparel  on ;  and  the  hot  blast  of  the  furnace  destroyed  the  men  who  were  employed  to  perforia 
tljis  service. 

VII.  Their  protection  and  preservation,  vs.  24 — 27.  The  astonished  monarch  who  had  com- 
manded three  men  to  bo  cast  in  hoimd,  saw  four  men  walking  in  the  midst  of  the  flames  loose; 
and  satisfied  now  they  had  a  divine  protector;  awed  by  the  miracle;  and  doubtless  dreading 
the  wrath  of  the  divine  being  that  had  become  their  protector,  he  commanded  them  suddenly 
to  come  out.  The  princes,  and  governors,  and  captains  were  gathered  together,  and  these  men, 
thus  remarkably  preserved,  appeared  before  them  uninjured. 

A'lII.  The  effect  on  the  king,  vs.  26 — 30.  As  in  the  case  when  Daniel  had  interpreted  his 
dream  (chap,  ii.),  he  acknowledged  that  this  was  the  act  of  the  true  God,  ver.  26.  He  issued  a 
solemn  command  that  the  God  who  had  done  this  should  be  honoured,  for  that  no  other  God 
vtould  deliver  in  this  manner,  ver.  27.  He  again  restored  them  to  their  honourable  command 
over  the  provinces,  ver.  30. 


1  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  ^made 
an  image  of  gold,  whose  height  %oas 

»  2  Ki.  19.  17,  IS.  Ps.  115.  4,  kc.    Is.  40. 19,  &c. 
Je.  16.  20.   Ac.  19.  26. 

1.  Nehuchadnezznr  the  Jiinr/  made  an 
image  of  cjold.  The  time  when  he  did 
this  is  not  mentioned  ;  nor  is  it  stated  in 
whose  honour,  or  for  what  design,  this 
colossal  image  was  erected.  In  the  Greek 
and  Arabic  translations,  this  is  said  to 
have  occurred  in  the  eighteenth  year  of 
Nebuchadnezzar.  This  is  not,  however, 
in  the  original  text,  nor  is  it  known  on 
what  authority  it  is  asserted.  Dean 
Prideaux  (Connex.  I.  222,)  supposes  that 
it  was  at  first  some  marginal  comment  on 
the  Greek  version  that  at  last  crept  into 


threescore  cubits,  and  the  breadth 
thereof  six  cubits :  he  set  it  up  in 
the  plain  of  Dura,  in  the  province 
of  Babylon. 


the  text,  and  that  there  was  probably 
some  good  authority  for  it.  If  this  is  the 
correct  account  of  the  time,  the  event  here 
recorded  occurred  B.  C.  5S7,  or,  according 
to  the  chronology  of  Prideaux,  about  nine- 
teen years  after  the  transaction  recorded 
in  the  previous  chapter.  Hales  makes  th« 
chronology  somewhat  different,  though  no. 
essentially.  According  to  him,  I)aniel 
was  carried  to  Babylon  B.  C.  686,  and 
the  image  was  setup  B.  C.  569,  making  an 
interval  from  the  time  that  ho  was  car- 
ried to  Babylon  of  seventeen  years;  and 


B  C.  580.] 


CHAPTER    III. 


175 


if  the  dream  (cli.  ii.)  was  explained  with- 
in three  or  four  years  after  Daniel  was 
taken  to  Babylon,  the  interval  between 
that  and  this  occurrence  would  be  some 
thirteen  or  fourteen  years.  Cahnet  makes 
the  captivity  of  Daniel  602  years  before 
Christ;  the  interpretation  of  the  dream 
59S ;  and  the  setting  up  of  the  image  556 
— thus  making  an  interval  of  more  than 
forty  years.  It  is  impossible  to  deter- 
mine the  time  with  certainty;  but  allow- 
ing the  shortest  mentioned  period  as  the 
interval  between  the  interpretation  of  the 
dream  (ch.  ii.)  and  the  erection  of  this 
statue,  the  time  would  be  sufficient  to 
account  for  the  fact  that  the  impression 
made  by  that  event  on  the  mind  of  Ncbu- 
•ihadnezzar,  in  favour  of  the  claims  of  the 
h'ue  God,  (ch.  ii.  4G,  47,)  seems  to  have 
been  entirely  effaced.  The  two  chapters, 
in  order  that  the  right  impression  may  be 
received  on  this  point,  should  be  read 
with  the  recollection  that  such  an  inter- 
val had  elapsed.  At  the  time  when  the 
event  here  recorded  is  supposed  by  Pri- 
deaux  to  have  occurred,  Nebuchadnezzar 
had  just  returned  from  finishing  the 
Jewish  war.  From  the  spoils  which  he 
had  taken  in  that  expedition  in  Syria  and 
Palestine,  he  had  the  means  in  abundance 
of  re.aring  such  a  colossal  statue  ;  and  at 
the  close  of  these  conquests,  nothing 
would  be  more  natural  than  that  he  should 
wish  to  rear  in  his  capital  some  splendid 
work  of  art  that  would  signalize  his  reign, 
record  the  memory  of  Lis  conquests,  and 
add  to  the  magnificence  of  the  capital. 
The  word  which  is  here  rendered  image — 
Chald.  nSs — Greek  lUova,  in  the  usu.al 
form  in  the  Hebrew,  means  a  shade, 
shadow ;  then  that  which  shadows  forth 
anything;  then  an  image  of  anything, 
and  then  an  idol,  as  representing  the 
deity  worshipped.  It  is  not  necessary 
to  suppose  that  it  was  of  solid  gold,  for 
the  amount  required  for  such  a  structure 
would  have  been  immense,  and  probably 
beyond  the  means  even  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. The  presumption  is,  that  it  was 
merely  covered  over  with  plates  of  gold, 
for  this  was  the  usual  manner  in  which 
statues  erected  in  honour  of  the  gods 
were  made.  See  Isa.  xl.  19.  It  is  not 
known  in  honour  of  whom  this  statue 
was  erected.  Grotius  supposed  that  it 
tvas  reared  to  the  memory  of  Nabopo- 
aassar,  the  father  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and 
observes  that  it  was  customary  to  erect 
tatues  in   this  manner  in  honour  of  pa- 


rents. Prideaux,  Hales,  the  Editor  of  tha 
Pict.  Bible,  and  most  others,  suppose  that 
it  was  in  honour  of  Bel,  the  principal 
deity  worshipped  in  Babylon.  See  Notes 
on  Isa.  xlvi.  1.  Some  have  supposed 
that  it  was  in  honour  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
himself,  and  that  he  purposed  by  it  to  bo 
worshipped  as  a  god.  But  this  opinion 
has  little  probability  in  its  favour.  The 
opinion  that  it  was  in  honour  of  Bel,  the 
principal  deity  of  the  place,  is  every  way 
the  most  probable,  and  this  derives  some 
confirmation  from  the  well-known  fact 
that  a  magnificent  image  of  this  kind 
was,  at  some  period  of  his  reign,  erected 
by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  honour  of  this  god, 
in  a  style  to  correspond  with  the  magni- 
ficence of  the  city.  The  account  of  this 
given  by  Herodotus  is  the  following : 
"The  temple  of  Jupiter  Belus,  whose 
huge  gates  of  brass  may  still  be  seen,  is  a 
square  building,  each  side  of  which  is  two 
furlongs.  In  the  midst  rises  a  tower,  of 
the  solid  depth  and  height  of  one  fur- 
long; upon  which,  resting  a.s  upon  .1 
base,  some  other  lesser  towers  are  built 
in  regular  succession.  The  ascent  is  on 
the  outside ;  which,  winding  from  the 
ground,  is  continued  to  the  highest 
tower;  and  in  the  middle  of  the  whole 
structure  there  is  a  convenient  resting- 
place.  In  the  last  tower  is  a  large  chapel, 
in  which  is  placed  a  couch,  magnificently 
adorned,  and  near  it  a  table  of  solid  gold; 
but  there  is  no  statue  in  the  place.  In 
this  temple  there  is  also  a  small  chapel, 
lower  in  the  building,  which  contains  a 
figure  of  Jupiter,  in  a  sitting  posture, 
with  a  large  table  before  him;  these,  with 
the  base  of  the  table  and  the  seat  of  the 
throne,  are  all  of  the  purest  gold,  and  are 
estimated  by  the  Chaldeans  to  be  worth 
eight  hundred  talents.  On  the  outside 
of  this  chapel  there  are  two  altars  ;  one 
is  gold,  the  other  is  of  immense  size,  and 
appropriated  to  the  sacrifice  of  full  grown 
animals  :  those  only  which  have  not  yet 
left  their  dams  may  be  ofi"ered  on  the 
golden  altar.  On  the  larger  altar,  at  the 
anniversary  festival  in  honour  of  their 
God,  the  Chaldeans  regularly  consume  in- 
cense to  the  amount  of  a  thousand  talents. 
There  was  formerly  in  this  temple  a  sta- 
tue of  solid  gold  twelve  cubits  high ; 
this,  however,  I  mention  from  the  infor- 
mation of  the  Chaldeans,  and  not  from 
my  own  knowledge."  Clio,  1S3.  Diodo- 
rus  Sieulus,  a  much  later  writer,  speaks 
to  this  efi"ect:  "Of  the  tower  of  Jupiter 


xTG 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  58C 


Belus,  the  historians  who  have  spoken 
have  given  different  descriptions;  and 
this  temple  being  now  entirely  destroyed, 
we  cannot  speak  accurately  respecting  it. 
It  was  excessively  high ;  constructed 
throughout  with  great  care ;  built  of 
brick  and  bitumen.  Semiramis  placed 
on  the  top  of  it  three  statues  of  massy 
gold,  of  Jupiter,  Juno,  and  Rhea.  Jupi- 
ter was  erect  in  the  altitude  of  a  man 
walking;  he  was  forty  feet  in  height; 
and  weighed  a  thousand  Babylonian 
talents;  Rhea,  who  sat  in  a  chariot  of 
gold,  was  of  the  same  weight.  Juno, 
who  stood  upright,  weighed  eight  hun- 
dred talents."  B.  II.  The  temple  of  Bel 
or  Belus  in  Babylon,  stood  until  the  time 
of  Xerxes;  but  on  his  return  from  the 
Grecian  expedition,  he  demolished  the 
whole  of  it,  and  laid  it  in  rubbish,  having 
first  plundered  it  of  its  immense  riches. 
Among  the  spoils  which  he  took  from 
the  temple,  are  mentioned  several  images 
and  statues  of  massive  gold,  and  among 
them  the  one  mentioned  by  Diodorus 
Siculus,  as   being  forty  feet   high.     See 


Strabo.  lib.  16,  p.  738;  Herodotus  lib.  1 
Arrian  de  Expe.  Alex.  lib.  7,  quoted  by 
Prideaux  I.  240.  It  is  not  very  probable 
that  the  image  which  Xerxes  removed 
was  the  same  which  Nebuchadnezzar 
reared  in  the  plain  of  Dura  (comp.  the 
Intro,  to  this  chapter,  §1,  VII.  o,);  but 
the  fact  that  such  a  colossal  statue  was 
found  in  Babylon  may  be  adduced  as  one 
incidental  corroboration  of  the  proba- 
bility of  the  statement  here.  It  is  not 
impossible  that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  led, 
as  the  Editor  of  Calmet"s  Dictionary  has 
remarked,  (Taylor  vol.  iii.  p.  194,)  to  the 
construction  of  this  image  by  what  he 
had  seen  in  Egypt.  He  had  conquered 
and  ravaged  Egypt  but  a  few  j'ears  be- 
fore this,  and  had  doubtless  been  struck 
with  the  wonders  of  art  which  ho  had 
seen  there.  Colossal  statues  in  honour 
of  the  gods  abounded,  and  nothing  would 
be  more  natural  than  that  Nebuchad- 
nezzar should  wish  to  make  his  capital 
rival  everything  which  he  had  seen  in 
Thebes.  1S[ or  is  it  improbable  that,  while 
he  sought  to  make  his  image  more  mag. 


GOLDEN   IMAGES. 


B.  C.  580.1 


CHAPTER    in. 


177 


nificent  and  costly  than  even  those  in 
Egypt  were,  the  views  of  sculpture  would 
be  about  the  same,  and  the  Ji'jurc  of  the 
statue  might  be  borrowed  from  what 
had  been  seen  in  Egypt.  It  may  per- 
haps furnish  some  illustration,  therefore, 
of  the  subject  before  us,  to  copy  here  some 
figures  from  Calmet,  representing  some 
of  the  usual  forms  of  statuary  in  Egypt. 
The  cut  on  page  176  represents  two 
"colossal  figures  which  yet  remain  stand- 
ing at  the  ancient  Thebes,"  and  is  copied 
from  Norden,  who  thus  describes  the 
figures.  "The  figure  A  seems  to  be 
that  of  a  man;  the  figure  B  that  of 
a  woman.  They  are  about  fifty  Danish 
feet  in  height,  from  the  basis  of  the 
pedestals  to  the  summit  of  the  head ; 
from  the  sole  of  the  feet  to  the  knees  is 
fifteen  feet;  the  pedestals  are  five  feet  in 
height,  thirty-six  and  a  half  long,  nine- 
teen and  a  half  broad."  *[  Wlmse  hciijlu 
was  threescore  cubits.  Prideau.x  and 
others  have  been  greatly  perplexed  at  the 
proportions  of  the  image  here  represented. 
Prideaux  says  on  the  subject,  (Connex. 
I.  2-tO,  241,)  "Nebuchadnezzar's  golden 
image  is  said  indeed  in  Scripture  to  have 
been  sixty  cubits,  that  is,  ninety  feet 
high  ;  but  this  must  be  understood  of  the 
image  and  pedestal  both  together;  for 
that  image  being  said  to  be  but  six  cubits 
broad  or  thick,  it  is  impossible  that  the 
image  would  have  been  sixty  cubits  high  ; 
for  that  makes  its  height  to  be  ten  times 
its  breadth  or  thickness,  which  exceeds 
all  the  proportions  of  a  man,  no  man's 
height  being  above  six  times  his  thick- 
ness, measuring  the  slenderest  man  living 
at  the  waist.  But  where  the  breadth  of 
this  image  was  measured  is  not  said ; 
perchance  it  was  from  shoulder  to  shoul- 
der ;  and  then  the  proportion  of  si.x  cubits 
breadth  will  bring  down  the  height  exactly 
to  the  measure  which  Diodorus  has  men- 
tioned: for  the  usual  height  of  a  man 
being  four  and  an  half  of  his  breadth 
between  the  shoulders,  if  the  image  were 
six  cubits  broad  between  the  tlioulders, 
it  must,  according  to  this  proportion, 
have  been  twenty-seven  cubits  high, 
which  is  forty  and  an  half  feet."  The 
statue  itself,  tiierefore,  according  to  Pri- 
deau.'c,  was  forty  feet  high;  the  pedestal, 
fifty  feet.  But  this,  says  Taylor,  the 
Editor  of  Calmet,  is  a  disproportion  of  parts 
■which,  if  not  absolutely  impossible,  is 
utterly  contradictory  to  every  principle 
of  art,  even  of  the  rudest  sort,     lo  meet 


the  difficulty,  Taylor  himBclf  supposes 
that  the  height  referred  to  in  the  descrip- 
tion was  rather  proportional,  than  actnni 
height;  that  is,  if  it  had  stood  upright  it 
would  have  been  sixty  cubits,  though  the 
actual  elevation  in  a  sitting  posture  may 
have  been  but  little  more  than  thirty 
cubits,  or  fifty  feet.  The  breadth,  he  sup- 
poses, was  rather  the  depth  or  thickness 
measured  from  the  breast  to  the  back 
than  the  breadth  measured  from  shoulder 
to  shoulder.  His  argument  and  illustra- 
tion may  be  seen  in  Calmet,  vol.  iii. 
Frag.  lo6.  It  is  not  absolutely  certain, 
however,  that  the  image  was  in  a  sitting 
posture,  and  the  natural  construction  of 
the  passage  is,  that  the  statue  was  actu- 
ally sixty  cubits  in  height.  No  one  can 
doubt  that  an  image  of  that  height  could 
be  erected;  and  when  we  remember  the 
one  at  Rhodes,  which  was  105  Grecian 
feet  in  height,  (see  Art.  Colossus,  in 
Anthon's  Class.  Die.,)  and  the  desire  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  to  adorn  his  capital  in 
the  most  magnificent  manner,  it  is  not  to 
be  regarded  as  improbable  that  an  image 
of  this  height  was  erected.  What  was 
the  height  of  the  pedestal,  if  it  stood  on 
any,  as  it  probably  did,  it  is  impossible 
now  to  tell.  The  length  of  the  cubit  was 
not  the  same  in  every  place.  The  length 
originally  was  the  distance  between  the 
elbow  and  the  extremity  of  the  middle 
finger,  about  eighteen  inches.  The  He- 
brew cubit,  according  to  Bishop  Cumber- 
land and  M.  Pelletier,  was  twenty-one 
inches;  but  others  fix  it  at  eighteen. 
Calmet.  The  Talmudists  say  that  the  He- 
brew cubit  was  larger  by  one  quarter  than 
the  Roman.  Herodotus  says  that  the 
cubit  in  Babylon  was  three  fingers  longer 
than  the  usual  one.  Clio,  178.  Still, 
there  is  not  absolute  certainty  on  that 
subject.  The  usual  and  probable  mea- 
surement of  the  cubit,  would  make  the 
image  in  Babylon  about  ninety  feet  high. 
^  And  the  breadth  thereof  six  cubit». 
About  nine  feet.  This  would,  of  course, 
make  tlie  height  ten  times  the  breadth, 
which  Prideaux  says  is  entirely  contrary 
to  the  usual  proportions  of  a  man.  It  is 
not  known  on  what  part  of  the  image 
this  measurement  was  made,  or  whether 
it  was  the  thickness  from  the  breast  to 
the  back,  or  the  width  from  shoulder  to 
shoulder.  If  the  thickness  of  the  image 
here  is  referred  to  by  the  word  "  breadth," 
the  proportion  would  be  well  preserved. 
"The  thickness   of    a  well-proponioned 


178 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  580 


2  Then  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king 
sent  to  gather  together  the  princes, 
the  governors,  and  the  captains,  the 

man,"  says  Scheuchzer  (Knupfer  Bibel, 
in  loc.)  "measured  from  tbe  breast  to  the 
back  is  one-tenth  of  his  height."  This 
was  understood  to  be  the  proportion  by 
Augustine,  Civi.  Dei,  L.  xv.  c.  26.  The 
word  which  is  here  rendered  breadth — 
v^S — occurs  nowhere  else  in  the  Chaldean 
of  the  Scriptures,  except  in  Ezra  vi.  3  : 
'■  Let  the  house  be  builded — the  height 
thereof  threescore  cubits,  and  the  breadth 
thereof  threescore  cubits."  Perhaps  this 
refers  rather  to  the  depth  of  the  temple 
from  front  to  rear,  as  Taylor  has  re- 
marked, than  to  the  breadth  from  one 
side  to  another.  If  it  does,  it  would  cor- 
respond with  the  measurement  of  Solo- 
mon's temple,  and  it  is  not  probable  that 
Cyrus  would  vary  from  that  plan  in  his 
instructions  to  build  a  new  temple.  If 
that  be  the  true  construction,  then  the 
meaning  here  may  be,  as  remarked  above, 
that  the  image  was  of  that  thickness,  and 
the  breadth  from  shoulder  to  shoulder 
may  not  be  referred  to.  */jHe  set  it  np  in 
the  plain  of  Dura.  It  would  seem  from 
this  that  it  was  sot  up  in  an  open  plain, 
and  not  in  a  temple  ;  perhaps  not  near  a 
temple.  It  was  not  unusual  to  erect  im- 
ages in  this  manner,  as  the  colossal  figure 
at  Rhodes  shows.  Where  this  plain  was, 
it  is  of  course  impossible  now  to  deter- 
mine. The  Greek  translation  of  the 
word  is  Accif:a — Deeira.  Jerome  says  that 
the  translation  of  Theodotion  is  Deira  ; 
of  Symmachus,  Doraum,  and  of  the  Ixx. 
ncpiSoXoi' — which  he  says  may  be  rendered 
vinariuin  vel  concliisum  Jocuiii.  "  Inter- 
preters commonly,"  says  Gesenius,  "com- 
pare Dura  a  city  mentioned  by  Aramin. 
Marcel.  25,  26,  situated  on  the  Tigris ; 
and  another  of  like  name  in  Polyb.  5.  48, 
on  the  Euphrates  near  the  mouth  of  the 
Chaboras."  It  is  not  necessary  to  sup- 
pose that  this  was  in  the  cit)/  of  Babylon  ; 
pnd,  indeed,  it  is  probable  that  it  was  not, 
as  the  "province  of  Babylon"  doubtless 
embraced  more  than  the  city,  and  an 
extensive  plain  seems  to  have  been  se- 
lected, perhaps  near  the  cit}',  as  a  place 
where  the  monument  would  be  more  con- 
spicuous, and  where  larger  numbers  could 
convene  for  the  homage  which  was  pro- 
posed to  be  shown   to  it.     ^/»i  the  pro- 


judges,  the  treasurers,  the  coun 
sellers,  the  sheriffs,  and  all  the 
rulers  of  the  provinces,  to  come  tc 


rjHce  of  Babylon.  One  of  the  provinces, 
or  departments,  embracing  the  capital, 
into  which  the  empire  was  divided,  oh. 
ii.  48. 

2.  Then  Nebuehadnezzar  the  hing  sent 
to  r/ather  torjether  the  j:irinces.  It  is  diffi- 
cult now,  if  not  impossible,  to  determine 
the  exact  meaning  of  the  words  used  here 
with  reference  to  the  various  ofiBcers 
designated;  and  it  is  not  material  that 
it  should  be  done.  The  general  sense  if, 
that  he  assembled  the  great  officers  of 
the  realm  to  do  honour  to  the  image. 
The  object  was  doubtless  to  make  the 
occasion  as  magnificent  as  possible.  Of 
course,  if  these  high  officers  were  assem- 
bled, an  immense  multitude  of  the  people 
would  congregate  also.  That  this  was 
contemplated,  and  that  it  in  fact  occurred, 
is  apparent  from  vs.  4,  7.  The  word 
rendered  ^:)r»!cfs—N;5.DV.V'Lii<— occurs  only 
in  Daniel,  in  Ezra,  and  in  Esther.  In 
Daniel  iii.  2,  3,  27  ;  vi.  1,  2,  3,  4,  6,  7,  it 
is  uniformly  rendered  princes;  in  Ezra 
viii.  36,  Esther,  iii.  12,  viii.  9,  ix.  3,  it 
is  uniformly  rendered  lieutenants.  The 
word  means,  according  to  Gesenius  (Zf.r.), 
"satraps,  the  governors  or  viceroys  of 
the  large  provinces  among  the  ancient 
Persians,  possessing  both  civil  and  mili- 
tarj'  power,  and  being  in  the  provinces 
the  representatives  of  the  sovereign, 
whose  state  and  splendour  they  also 
rivaled."  The  etymology  of  the  word  is 
not  certainly  known.  The  Persian  word 
satrap  seems  to  have  been  the  foundation 
of  this  word,  with  some  slight  modifica- 
tions adapting  it  to  the  Cbaldee  mode  of 
pronunciation.  *^And  governors. — NM.lp» 
This  word  is  rendered  governors  in  ch. 
ii.  48.  (See  Notes  on  that  place,  and  in 
ch.  iii.  2,  3,  27  ;  vi.  7.)  It  does  not  else- 
where occur.  The  Hebrew  word  corres  • 
ponding  to  this,  CMp  occurs  frequently, 
and  is  rendered  riders  in  every  place  ex- 
cept Isa.  xli.  25,  where  it  is  rendered 
princes.  Ezra  ix.  2;  Neh.  ii.  IC,  iv.  14, 
V.  7,  17,  vii.  5  ;  Jer.  Ii.  23,  28,  67  ;  Ezek, 
xxiii.  6,  12,  23,  et  al.  The  office  was 
evidently  one  that  was  inforicr  to  thai 
of  the  satrap,  or  governor  of  a  whole 
province.    ^And  captains.     Knjn?.     Thia 


B.  C.  580.J 


CHAPTER    III. 


179 


the  dedication  v  f  the  image  which 
Nebuchadnezzai  the  king  had  sot  up. 
3  Then  the  princes,  the  govern- 
ors and  captains,  the  judges,  the 
treasurers,  the  counsellors,  the  she- 
rifls,  and  all  the  rulers  of  the  pro- 
vinces, were  gathered  together  unto 
the  dedication  of  the  image  that  Ne- 


word,  wherever  it  occurs  in  Daniel,  is 
vcndcred-  captains,  ch.  iii.  2,  3,  27,  vi.  7  ; 
TPherever  else  it  occurs  it  is  rendered 
governor,  Ezra  v.  3,  6,  U,  vi.  6,  7,  13. 
The  Hebrew  word  corresponding  to  this, 
nnp>  occurs  frequently,  and  is  also  ren- 
dered indifferently  governor  or   captain. 

1  Kings  X.  15;  2  Chron.  ix.  14;  Ezra 
viii.  3G  ;  1  Kings  xx.  24;  Jer.  li.  23,  28, 
57,  et  al.  It  refers  to  the  governor  of  a 
province  less  than  a  satrapy,  and  is  ap- 
plied to  officers  in  the  Assyrian   empire, 

2  Kings  xviii.  24,  Jer.  xxxvi.  9  ;  in  the 
Chaldean,  Ezek.  xxiii.  0,  23,  Jer.  li.  23, 
and  in  the  Persian,  Est.  viii.  9,  ix.  3. 
The  word  captains  does  not  now  very 
accurately  express  the  sense.  The  office 
was  not  exclusively  military,  and  was  of 
a  higher  grade  than  would  bo  denoted  by 
the  word  cap)tain  with  us.  ^\The  jiahjes. 
^^>nT3^^^<.  This  word  occurs  only  here, 
and  in  ver.  3.  It  means  properly  great 
or  chief  judges — compounded  of  two 
words  signifying  greatness,  and  judges. 
See  Gesenius,  Lex.  %  The  treasurers. 
Knai?.  This  word  occurs  nowhere  else. 
The  word  n3rj — Gishur,  however,  the 
same  word  with  a  slight  change  in  the 
pronunciation,  occurs  in  Ezra  i.  S,  vii.  21, 
and  denotes  treasurer.  It  is  derived 
from  a  word  (rjj)  which  means  to  hide, 
to  hoard,  to  lay  up  in  store.  •[  The  counsel- 
lors, snan"!.  This  word  occurs  no- 
where else,  except  in  ver.  3.  It  means  one 
skilled  in  the  law  ;  a  judge.  The  office 
was  evidently  inferior  to  the  one  denoted 
by  the  word  judges.  •[  The  sheriffs.  A 
sheriff  with  us  is  a  county  officer,  to  whom 
is  entrusted  the  administration  of  the 
laws.  In  England  the  office  is  judicial 
as  well  as  ministerial.  With  us  it  is 
merely  ministerial.  The  duty  of  the 
sheriff  is  to  execute  the  civil  and  criminal 
processes  throughout  the  count}'.  He  has 
charge  of  the  jail  and  prisoners,  and 
attends  courts,  and  keeps  the  peace.  It 
'a  not  to  be  supposed  that  the  officer  here 


buchadnezzar  the  king  had  set  up  ; 
and  they  stood  before  the  image  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  had  set  up. 

4  Then  a  herald  cried  » aloud.  To 
you  i)it  is  commanded,  0  •=  people, 
nations,  and  languages. 


'  with  might,  c.  3.  14. 
<:  c.  4. 1. 


b  thei/  command. 
e.  25. 


referred  to  in  Daniel,  corresponds  pre- 
cisely with  this.  The  word  used — x;pDn 
— occurs  nowhere  else.  It  means,  accord- 
ing to  Gesenius,  persons  learned  in  the 
law;  lawyers.  The  office  had  a  close  rela- 
tion to  that  of  ifufti  among  the  Arabs, 
the  term  being  derived  from  the  same 
word,  and  properly  means  "a wise  man; 
one  whose  response  is  equivalent  to  law." 
^^And  all  the  rulers  of  the  provinces.  The 
term  here  used  is  a  general  term,  and 
would  apply  to  any  kind  of  officers  or 
rulers,  and  is  probably  designed  to  em- 
brace all  which  had  not  been  specified. 
The  object  was  to  assemble  the  chief 
officers  of  the  realm.  Jacchides  has  com- 
pared the  officers  here  enumerated  with 
the  principal  officers  of  the  Turkish  em- 
pire, and  supposes  that  a  counterpart  to 
them  may  be  found  in  that  empire.  See 
the  comparison  in  Grotius,  in  loc.  He 
supposes  that  the  officers  last  denoted  un- 
der the  title  of  "rulers of  the  provinces," 
were  similar  to  the  Turkish  Zangiahos, 
or  viziers.  Grotius  supposes  that  the 
term  refers  to  the  rulers  of  cities,  and 
places  adjacent  to  cities — a  dominion  of 
less  extent  and  importance  than  that  of 
the  rulers  of  provinces.  %To  the  dedica- 
tion of  the  image,  &c.  The  public  set- 
ting it  apart  to  the  purposes  for  which  it 
was  erected.  This  was  to  be  done  with 
solemn  music,  and  in  the  presence  of  tha 
principal  officers  of  the  kingdom.  Untu 
it  was  dedicated  to  the  god  in  whoso 
honour  it  was  erected,  it  would  not  be 
regarded  as  an  object  of  worship.  It  is 
easy  to  conceive  that  such  an  occasion 
would  bring  together  an  immense  con- 
course of  people,  and  that  it  would  be 
one  of  peculiar  magnificence. 

3.  And  the>/ stood  before  the  image.  In 
the  presence  of  the  image.  They  were 
drawn  up,  doubtless  so  as  at  the  same  time 
to  have  the  best  view  of  the  statue,  and 
to  make  the  most  imposing  appearance. 

4.  Then  a  herald  cried  aloud.  Marg., 
as  in  Chald.,  with  might.    He  made  a  loud 


180 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  580. 


5  That  at  what  time  ye  hear  the 
sound  of  the  cornet,  fiute,  harp, 
sackbut,  psaltery,  a  dulcimer,  and  all 

a  symphony,  or,  singing. 

proclamation.  A  herald  here  means  a 
public  crier.  %To  you  it  is  commanded. 
Marg.,  thei/  commanded.  Literally,  'to 
you  commanding'  (plural) ;  that  is,  the 
king  has  commanded.  fO  people,  na- 
tions, and  languages.  The  empire  of 
Babylon  was  made  up  of  different  nations, 
speaking  quite  different  languages.  The 
representatives  of  these  nations  were  as- 
sembled on  this  occasion,  and  the  com- 
mand would  extend  to  all.  There  was 
evidently  no  exception  made  in  favour  of 
the  scruples  of  anj',  and  the  order  would 
include  the  Hebrews  as  well  as  others.  It 
should  be  observed,  however,  that  no  oth- 
ers but  the  Hebrew?  would  have  any  scru- 
ples on  the  subject.  They  were  all  accus- 
tomed to  worship  idols,  and  the  worship 
of  one  god  did  not  prevent  their  doing 
homage  also  to  another.  It  accorded  with 
the  prevailing  views  of  idolaters  that 
there  were  many  gods  ;  that  there  were 
tutelary  divinities  presiding  over  particu- 
lar people;  and  that  it  was  not  improper 
to  render  homage  to  the  god  of  any  peo- 
ple or  country.  Though,  therefore,  they 
might  themselves  worship  other  gods  in 
their  own  countries,  they  would  have  no 
scruples  about  worshipping  also  the  one 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  had  setup.  In  this 
respect  the  Jews  were  an  exception.  They 
acknowledged  but  one  God  ;  they  believed 
that  all  others  were  false  gods,  and  it  was 
a  violation  of  the  fundamental  principles 
of  their  religion  to  render  homage  to  any 
other. 

5.  That  at  wJiat  time  ije  hear  the  sound 
of  the  cornet.  It  would  not  be  practicable 
to  determine  with  precision  what  kind  of 
instruments  of  music  are  denoted  by  the 
words  used  in  this  verse.  They  were, 
doubtless,  in  many  respects  different  from 
those  which  are  in  use  now,  though  they 
may  have  belonged  to  the  same  general 
class,  and  may  have  been  constructed  on 
substantially  the  same  principles.  A  full 
inquiry  into  the  kinds  of  musical  instru- 
ments in  use  among  the  Hebrews,  maybe 
found  in  the  various  treatises  on  the  sub- 
ject in  Ugolin's  Thesau.  Ant.  Sacra,  torn. 
xxxii.  Comp.  also  the  Notes  on  Isa.  v. 
12.  Tha  Chaldee  word  rendered  comet — 
Hj'^'i — the  same  as  the  Hebrew  word  pp — 


kinds  of  music,  ye  fall  down  and 
worship  the  golden  image  that  Ne- 
buchadnezzar   the    king    hath    set 


heren,  means  a  horn,  as  e.  g.,  of  an  ox, 
stag,  ram.  Then  it  means  a  wind  instru- 
ment of  music  resembling  a  horn,  or  per- 
haps horns  were  at  first  literally  used. 
Similar  instruments  are  now  used,  as  the 
French  horn,  &c.  *^Flute.  t<n''|7'n"'i; — 
mashrohitha.  Gr.  aipiyyoi.  "VuXg.  fstula, 
2)ipe.  The  Chaldee  word  occurs  nowhere 
else  but  in  this  chapter,  vs.  5,  7,  10,  15, 
and  is  in  each  instance  rendered _/?«<<?.  It 
probably  denoted  all  the  instruments  of 
the  pipe  or  flute  class  in  use  among  the 
Babylonians.  The  corresponding  Hebrew 
word  is  SiSn — hhalil.  See  this  explained 
in  the  Notes  on  Isa.  v.  12.  The  following 
remarks  of  the  Editor  of  the  Pictorial  Bi- 
ble will  explain  the  usual  construction  of 
the  ancient  pipes  or  flutes  :  "  The  ancient 
flutes  were  cylindrical  tubes,  sometimes 
of  equal  diameter  throughout,  but  often 
wider  at  the  off  than  the  near  end,  and 
sometimes  widened  at  that  end  into  a 
funnel  shape,  resembling  a  clarionet. 
They  were  always  blown,  like  pipes,  at 
one  end,  never  transversely;  they  had 
mouth-pieces,  and  sometimes  plugs  or 
stopples,  but  no  keys  to  open  or  close  the 
holes  beyond  the  reach  of  the  hands.  Tha 
holes  varied  in  number  in  the  different 
varieties  of  the  fiute.  In  their  origin  they 
were  doubtless  made  of  simple  reeds  or 
canes,  but  in  the  progress  of  improve- 
ment they  came  to  be  made  of  wood, 
ivory,  bone,  and  even  metal.  They  were 
sometimes  made  in  joints,  but  connected 
by  an  interior  nozzle  which  was  generally 
of  wood.  The  flutes  were  sometimes 
double,  that  is,  a  person  played  on  two 
instruments  at  once,  either  connect(;d  or 
detached;  and  among  the  classical  an- 
cients the  player  on  the  double-flute  often 
had  a  leathern  bandage  over  his  mouth  to 
prevent  the  escape  of  his  breath  at  the 
corners.  The  ancient  Egyptians  used  the 
double-flute."  Illustrations  of  the  flute 
or  pipe  may  be  seen  in  the  Notes  on  Isa. 
V.  12.  Very  full  and  interesting  descrip- 
tions of  the  musical  instruments  which 
were  used  among  the  Egyptians,  may  be 
found  in  Wilkinson's  Manners  and  Cus- 
toms of  the  ancient  Egyptians,  vol.  ii. 
pp.  222—327.     The  following  cut  will  fur- 


B.  C.  580.] 


CHAPTER    III. 


181 


ANCIENT   EGYPTIAN   FLUTES,  SINGLE    AND    DOUBLE. 


nish  an  illustration  of  the  usual  form  of 
this  instrument  among  the  ancients. 
%  Harp.  On  the  form  of  the  harp,  see 
Notes  on  Isa.  v.  12.  Comp.  Wilkinson,  as 
above  quoted.  The  harp  was  one  of  the 
earliest  instruments  of  music  that  was 
invented,  Gen.  iv.  21.  The  Chaldee  word 
here  used  is  not  the  jommon  Hebrew  word 
to  denote  the  harp  ("iIj^,  kinnor),  but  is  a 
■word  which  does  not  occur  in  Hebrew 
— Dnn^i^ — kathros.  This  occurs  no^shere 
else  in  the  Chaldee,  and  it  is  manifestly 
the  same  as  the  Greek  xiSupa,  and  the  La- 
tin citliara,  denoting  a  harp.  Whether 
the  Chaldees  derived  it  from  the  Greeks, 
or  the  Greeks  from  the  Chaldees,  however, 
cannot  be  determined  with  certainty.  It 
has  been  made  an  objection  to  the  genu- 
ineness of  the  book  of  Daniel  that  the  in- 
struments here  referred  to  were  instru- 
ments bearing  Greek  names.  See  Intro. 
§2,  IV.  (c)(5').  *lSackhut.  Vulg.  .S-aw- 
buca.  Gr.  like  the  Vulg.  aajifJiKn.  These 
words  are  merely  different  forms  of  wri- 
ting the  Chaldee  word  Np3p — salbecha. 
The  word  occurs  nowhere  else  except  in 
this  chapter.  It  seems  to  have  denoted 
a  stringed  instrument  similar  to  the  lyre 
or  harp.  Strabo  affirms  that  the  Greek 
word  aanPuKr] — sambi/ke,  is  of  barbarian, 
that  is,  of  oriental  origin.  The  Hebrew 
word  from  which  this  word  is  not  impro- 
bably derived — TSp)  sahach — means  <o  in- 
terweave, to  entwine,  to  plait,  as  e.  g. 
branches;  and  it  is  possible  that  this  in- 
strument may  have  derived  its  name  from 
the  intertwining  of  the  strings.  Comp. 
Gtesenius  on  the  word.     Passow  defines 

16 


the  Greek  Tiord  aafi^vKn — sambuca  (Lat.), 
to  mean  a  triangular  stringed  instrument 
that  made  the  highest  notes,  or  had  tho 
highest  key  ;  but  as  an  instrument  which, 
on  account  of  tho  shortness  of  the  strings, 
was  not  esteemed  ns  very  valuable,  and 
had  little  power.  Porphyry  and  Suidas 
describe  it  as  a  triangular  instrument, 
furnished  with  cords  of  unequal  length 
and  thickness.  The  classical  writers  men- 
tion it  as  very  ancient,  and  ascribe  its 
invention  to  the  Syrians.  Musonius 
describes  it  as  having  a  sharp  sound  ;  and 
we  are  also  told  that  it  was  often  used  tc 
accompany  the  voice  in  singing  iambic 
verses.  Pict.  Bib.  It  seems  to  have 
been  a  species  of  triangular  lyre  or  harp. 
^Psalteri/.  The  Chaldee  is  ii^.npSi— pe- 
santerin.  Gr.  ipaXrripiov  ;  Yu]g.  psalterium. 
All  these  words  manifestly  have  the  samo 
origin,  and  it  has  been  on  the  ground 
that  this  word  among  others  is  of  Greek 
origin,  that  the  genuineness  of  this  book 
has  been  called  in  question.  The  word 
occurs  nowhere  else  but  in  this  chapter, 
vs.  5,  7,  10,  15.  The  Greek  translators 
often  use  the  word  tpaXriipiov — psaltery — 
for  Sd: — nt'bhel,and  "i1j3 — ii'inior,  and  the 
instrument  here  referred  to  was  doubtless 
of  the  harp  kind.  For  the  kind  of  instru- 
ment denoted  by  the  S31 — nebKt-l,  see 
Notes  on  Isa.  v.  12.  Comp.  the  illustra- 
tions in  the  Pict.  Bible  on  Psalm  xcii.  3. 
It  has  been  alleged  that  this  word  is  of 
Greek  origin,  and  hence  an  objection  has 
been  urged  against  the  genuineness  of 
the  Book  of  Daniel,  on  the  presumption 
!  that,  at  the  early  period  when  this  book 


182 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  5SC 


is  supposed  to  have  been  written,  Greek 
musical  instruments  had  not  been  in- 
troduced into  Chaldea.  For  a  general 
reply  to  this,  see  the  Intro.  ^  2,  IV.  (e)  (S.) 
It  may  be  remarked  further  in  regard  to 
this  objection,  (1)  that  it  is  not  absolutely 
certain  that  the  word  is  derived  from  the 
Greek.  See  Pareau  1.  c.  p.  524,  as 
quoted  in  Ilengstenberg  Authentie  des 
Daniel,  p.  16.  (2)  It  cannot  be  demon- 
strated that  there  were  no  Greeks  in  the 
regions  of  Chaldea  as  early  as  this.  In- 
deed, it  is  more  than  probable  that  there 
were.  Sec  Ilengstenberg,  p.  16.  seq. 
Nebuchaduozzar  summoned  to  this  cele- 
bration the  principal  personages  through- 
out the  realm,  and  it  is  probable  that 
there  would  be  collected  on  such  an  oc- 
casion all  the  forms  of  music  that  were 
known,  whether  of  domestic  or  foreign 
origin.  ^  Dulcimer.  K^^JDDID — sumponya. 
This  word  occurs  only  here,  and  inverses 
13,  15  of  this  chapter.  In  the  margin  it 
is  rendered  symjihony  or  singin<j.  It  is 
the  same  as  the  Greek  word  avjupwvia — 
symphony,  and  in  Italy  the  same  instru- 
ment of  music  is  now  called  by  a  name 
of  the  same  origin,  caw/pof/Ho,  and  in 
Asia  Miner  zamltovja.  It  answered  pro- 
bably to  the  Hebrew  3Jij*,  rendered  organ, 
in  Gen.  iv.  21,  Job  xxi.  12,  xsx.  31,  Ps. 
cl.  4.  See  Notes  on  Job  xxL  12.  Comp. 
the  tracts  on  Hebrew  musical  instruments 
inscribed  schilte  haggihhorim  in  Ugolin, 
Thesau.  vol.  xxxii.  The  word  seems  to 
have  had  a  Greek  origin,  and  is  one  of 
those  on  which  an  objection  has  been 
founded  against  the  genuineness  of  the 
book.  Comp.  the  Intro.  ^  2,  IV.  (c)  (7.) 
The  word  dulcimer  means  su'ect,  and 
would  denote  some  instrument  of  music 
that  was  char.acterized  by  the  sweetness 
of  its  tones.  Johnson  (Die.)  describes  the 
instrument  as  one  that  is  "played  by 
striking  brass  wires  with  little  sticks." 
The  Greek  word  would  denote  properly  a 
concert  or  harmony  of  many  instruments ; 
but  the  word  here  is  evidently  used  to 
denote  a  single  instrument.  Gesenius 
describes  it  as  a  double  pipe  with  a  sack  ; 
a  bagpipe.  Servius  (on  Virg.  Aen.  si. 
27)  describes  the  symiyhonia  as  a  bagpipe  : 
and  the  Hebrew  writers  speak  of  it  as  a  bag- 
pipe, consisting  of  two  pipes  thrust  through 
a  leathern  bag,  and  affording  a  mournful 
sound.  It  may  be  added  that  this  is  the 
?ame  name  which  the  bagpipe  bore  among 
the  Moors  in  Spain;  and  all  these  cir- 


cumstances concur  to  show  that  this 
was  probably  the  insttumcnt  intendea 
here.  "  The  modern  oriental  bagpipe  is 
composed  with  a  goat  skin,  usually  with 
the  hair  on,  and  in  the  natural  form,  but 
deprived  of  the  head,  the  tail,  and  tho 
feet:  being  thus  of  the  same  shape  as 
that  used  by  the  water  carriers.  The 
pipes  are  usually  of  reeds,  terminating  in 
the  tips  of  cows'  horns  slightly  curved ;  the 
whole  instrument  being  most  primitively 
simple  in  its  materials  and  construction." 
Pict.  Bib.     The  annexed  cut  will  furnish 


BAGPIPE. 

an  illustration  of  this  instrument.  ^  And 
all  Idnds  of  music.  All  other  kinds.  It 
is  not  probable  that  all  the  instruments 
employed  on  that  occasion  were  actually 
enumerated.  Only  the  principal  instru- 
ments are  mentioned,  and  among  them 
those  which  showed  that  such  as  were  of 
foreign  origin  were  emploj'cd  on  the  oc- 
casion. From  the  following  extract  from 
Chardin  it  will  be  seen  that  the  account 
here  is  not  an  improbable  one,  and  thai 
such  things  were  not  uncommon  in  the 
East:  "At  the  coronation  of  Soliman, 
king  of  Persia,  the  general  of  the  mus- 
queteers  having  whispered  some  moments 
in  the  king's  ear,  among  several  other 
things  of  lesser  importance  gave  out,  that 
both  the  loud  and  soft  music  should  play 
in  the  two  balconies  upon  the  top  of  the 
great  building  which  stands  at  one  end 
of  the  palace  royal,  called  kaisarit,  or 


B.  C.  580.] 


CHAPTER    III. 


m 


G  And  » whoso  falleth  not  down  hour  be   cast  into  tho  midst  of  a 
and  -worsbjppeth    shall    the    same  burning  fiery  ''furnace. 


place  imperial.  No  nation  was  dispensed 
with,  whether  Persians,  Indians,  Turks, 
Muscovites,  Europeans,  or  others  ;  which 
was  immediately  done.  And  this  same 
tintamarve,  or  confusion  of  instruments, 
which  sounded  more  like  the  noise  of 
war  than  music,  lasted  twenty  days  to- 
gether, without  intermission,  or  the  inter- 
ruption of  night;  which  number  of 
twenty  days  was  observed  to  answer  the 
number  of  the  young  monarch's  }'ears, 
who  was  then  twenty  years  of  age."  p.  51. 
Quoted  in  Taylor's  Fragments  to  Calmet's 
Die.  No.  485.  It  may  be  observed,  also, 
that  in  such  an  assemblage  of  instruments, 
nothing  would  be  more  probable  than  that 
there  would  be  some  having  names  of  for- 
eign origin,  perhaps  names  whose  origin 
was  to  be  found  in  nations  not  represented 
there.  But  if  this  should  occur,  it  would 
not  be  proper  to  set  the  fact  down  as  an 
argument  against  the  authenticity  of  the 
history  of  Father  Chardin,  and  as  little 
should  the  similar  fact  revealed  here  be 
regarded  as  an  argument  against  the 
genuineness  of  the  book  of  Daniel.  *\  Ye 
shall  fall  down  and  worship.  That  is, 
you  shall  render  relir/ious  honiar/e.  Sec 
these  words  explained  in  the  Notes  on 
ch.  ii.  46.  This  shows,  that  whether  this 
image  was  erected  in  honour  of  Belus,  or 
of  Nabopolassar,  it  was  designed  that  he 
in  whose  honour  it  was  erected  should  be 
worshipped  as  a  god. 

6  And  whoso  falleth  not  down  and  wor- 
shippeth.  The  order  in  this  verse  seems 
to  be  tyrannical,  and  it  is  contrary  to  all 
our  notions  of  freedom  of  religious  opin- 
ion and  worship.  But  it  was  much  in 
the  spirit  of  that  age,  and  indeed  of 
almost  every  age.  It  was  an  act  to  en- 
force uniformitj'  in  religion  by  the  au- 
thority of  the  civil  magistrate,  and  to 
secure  it  by  threatened  penalties.  It 
should  be  observed,  however,  that  the 
command  at  that  time  would  not  be  re- 
garded as  harsh  and  oppressive  by  heathen 
worshippers,  and  might  be  complied  with 
consistently  with  their  views  without  in- 
fringing on  their  notions  of  religious 
liberty.  The  homage  rendered  to  one 
god  did  not,  according  to  their  views, 
fonflict  with  any  honour  that  was  due  to 
another,  and,  though  they  were  required  J 


bJc.  29.  22. 


to  worship  this  divinity,  that  would  not 
be  a  prohibition  against  worshipping  any 
other.  It  was  also  in  accordance  with 
all  the  views  of  heathenism  that  all  pro- 
per honour  should  be  rendered  to  the 
particular  god  or  gods  which  any  people 
adored.  The  nations  assembled  here 
would  regard  it  as  no  dishonour  shown  to 
the  particular  deity  whom  they  wor- 
shipped, to  render  homage  to  the  god 
worshipped  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  as  this 
command  implied  no  prohibition  against 
worshipping  any  other  god.  It  was  only 
in  respect  to  those  who  held  that  there 
is  but  one  God,  and  that  all  homage  ren- 
dered to  any  other  is  morally  wrong,  that 
this  command  would  be  oppressive.  Ac- 
cordingly the  contemplated  vengeance 
fell  only  on  the  Jews — all,  of  every  other 
nation,  who  were  assembled,  complying 
with  the  command  without  hesitation. 
It  violated  vo  principle  which  they  held 
to  render  the  homage  which  was  claimed, 
for  though  they  had  their  own  tutelary 
gods  whom  they  worshipped,  they  sup- 
posed the  same  was  true  of  every  other 
people,  and  that  their  gods  were  equally 
entitled  to  respect;  but  it  violated  ever?/ 
principle  on  which  the  Jew  acted — for  be 
believed  that  there  was  but  one  God  rul- 
ing over  all  nations,  and  that  homage 
rendered  to  any  other  was  morally  wrong. 
Comp.  Hengstenbcrg  Authentic  des  Da- 
niel, pp.  So,  84.  ^  Shall  the  same  hour. 
This  accords  with  the  general  character 
of  an  oriental  despot,  accustomed  to  en- 
join implicit  obedience  by  the  most  sum- 
mary process,  and  it  is  entirely  conform- 
able to  the  whole  character  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. It  would  seem  from  this,  that  there 
was  an  apprehension  that  some  among 
the  multitudes  assembled  would  refuse  to 
obey  the  command.  Whether  there  was 
any  design  to  make  this  bear  hard  on  the 
Jews,  it  is  impossible  now  to  determine. 
The  word  which  is  here  rendered  hour — 
X  n  i;  V — is  probably  from  n;T' — to  look, 
and  properly  denotes  a  look,  a  glance  of 
the  eye,  and  then  the  time  of  such  a 
glance — a  moment,  an  instant.  It  does  not 
refer  to  an  hour,  as  understood  by  us,  but 
means  instantly,  immediaielif — as  quick 
as  the  glance  of  an  eye.  The  word  is  no; 
found  in  Hebrew,  and  occurs  in  Chaldea 


184 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  580. 


7  Therefore  at  that  time,  ■when  the  golden  image  that  Nebuchad- 
all  the  people  heard  the  sound  of  nezzar  the  king  had  set  up. 
the  cornet,  flute,  harp,  sackljut,  8  Wherefore  at  tliat  time  certain 
psaltery,  and  all  kinds  of  music,  all  Chaldeans  came  near,  and  accused 
the  people,  the  nations,  and  the  Ian-  the  Jews, 
guages,  fell  down  a)id  worshipped 

only  in  Dan.  iii.  6,  15  ;  iv.  ]9,  So  ;  v.  5, 
in  each  case  rendered  hour.  Nothing  can 
be  inferred  from  it,  however,  in  regard  to 
the  division  of  time  among  the  Chaldeans 
into  hours — though  Herodotus  says  that 
the  Greeks  received  the  division  of  the 
day  into  twelve  parts  from  them.  Lib. 
2,  c.  109.  ^.  Be  cast  into  the  midst  of  a 
bunn'iirj  fiery  furnace.  The  word  here 
rendered /i()-ii«ce — pnN — uttnn,  is  derived 
from  Jin — tenan,  to  smole ;  and  maybe 
applied  to  any  species  of  furnace,  or  large 
oven.  It  does  not  denote  the  use  to 
which  the  furnace  was  commonly  ap- 
plied, or  the  form  of  its  construction. 
Any  furnace  for  burning  lime — if  lime 
was  then  burned,  or  fur  burning  bricks, 
if  the}'  were  burned,  or  for  smelting  ore, 
would  correspond  with  the  meaning  of 
the  word.  Nor  is  it  said  whether  the 
furnace  referred  to  would  be  one  that 
would  be  constructed  lor  the  occasion,  or 
one  in  common  use  for  some  other  pur- 
pose. The  editor  of  Calmet  (Taylor) 
supposes  that  the  '  furnace'  here  referred 
to  was  rather  a  fire  kindled  in  the  open 
court  of  a  temple,  like  a  place  set  apart 
for  burning  raartj-rs,  than  a  closed  fur- 
nace of  brick.  See  Cal.  Die.  vol.  iv.  p. 
330,  seq.  The  more  obvious  representa- 
tion, however,  is,  that  it  was  a.  closed 
place  in  which  the  intensity  of  the  fire 
could  be  greatly  increased.  Such  a  mode 
of  punishment  is  not  uncommon  in  the 
East.  Chardin  (vi.  p.  118,)  after  speak- 
ing of  the  common  modes  of  inflicting 
the  punishment  of  death  in  Persia,  re- 
marks that  'there  are  other  modes  of  in- 
flicting the  punishment  of  death  on  those 
who  have  violated  the  police  laws,  espe- 
cially those  who  have  contributed  to  pro- 
duce scarcity  of  food,  or  who  have  used 
false  weight,  or  who  have  disregarded, 
the  laws  respecting  taxes.  The  cooks,' 
lays  he,  'were  fixed  on  spits,  and  roasted 
aver  a  gentle  fire,  (Comp.  Jer.  xxix.  22), 
and  the  bakers  were  cast  into  a  burning 
oven.  In  the  year  166S,  when  the  famine 
»Tas  raging,  I  saw  in  the  royal  residence 
m  Ispahan  one  of  these  ovens  burning 


to  terrify  the  bakers,  and  to  prevent  their 
taking  advantage  of  the  scarcity  to  in- 
crease their  gains.'  See  Rosenmiiller, 
Alte  u.neue  Morgenland,  "'ii  loc. 

7.  All  the  people,  the  natious,  the  lan- 
guar/es,  fell  doicn,  <tc.  All  excepting  the 
Jews.  An  express  exception  is  made  in 
regard  to  them  in  the  following  verses, 
and  it  does  not  appear  that  any  of  them 
were  present  on  this  occasion.  It  would 
seem  that  only  the  officers  had  been  sum- 
moned to  be  present,  and  it  is  not  im- 
probable that  all  the  rest  of  the  Jewish 
nation  absented  themselves. 

8.  Wherefore  at  that  time  certain  Chal- 
deans came  near  and  accused  the  Jews.  It 
does  not  appear  that  they  accused  tho 
Jews  in  general,  butparticularly  Shadrach, 
Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  ver.  12.  They 
were  present  on  the  occasion,  being  sum- 
moned with  the  other  oflBcers  of  tho 
realm,  (ver.  2,)  but  they  could  not  unite 
in  the  idolatrous  worship.  It  has  been 
frequently  said  that  the  whole  thing  was 
arranged,  either  by  the  king  of  his  own 
accord,  or  by  the  instigation  of  their  ene- 
mies, with  a  view  to  involve  the  Jews  in 
difficulty,  knowing  that  they  could  not 
conscientiously  comply  with  the  com- 
mand to  worship  the  image.  But  nothing 
of  this  kind  appears  in  the  narrative 
itself.  It  does  not  appear  that  the  Jews 
were  unpopular,  or  that  there  was  any 
less  disposition  to  show  favour  to  them 
than  to  any  other  foreigners.  They  had 
been  raised  indeed  to  high  ofiices,  but 
there  is  no  evidence  that  any  oflnce  was 
conferred  on  them  which  it  was  not  re- 
garded as  proper  to  confer  on  foreigners  ; 
nor  is  there  any  evidence  that  in  the  dis- 
charge of  the  duties  of  the  office  they  had 
given  occasion  for  a  just  accusation.  The 
plain  account  is,  that  the  king  set  up  the 
image,  for  other  purposes,  and  with  no  ma- 
licious design  towards  them  ;  that  when 
summoned  to  be  present  with  the  other 
ofiicers  of  the  realm  at  the  dedication  of 
the  image  they  obeyed  the  command  ; 
but  that  when  the  order  was  issued  that 
they  should  render  religious  homage  to 
the  idol,  every  principle  of  their  religion 


B.  C.  580.] 


CHAPTER  III. 


185 


9  Thoy  spake  and  said  to  the 
king  Nebuchadnezzar,  0  king,  live 
»for  ever. 

10  Thou,  0  king,  hast  made  a  de- 
cree, that  every  man  that  shall  hear 
the  sound  of  the  cornet,  flute,  harp, 
sackbut,  psalteiy,  and  dulcimer, 
and  all  kinds  of  music,  shall  fall 
do\\Ti  and  worship  the  golden  im- 
age: 

11  And  vrhoso  falleth  not  down 
and  worshippeth,  that  he  should 
be  cast  into  the  midst  of  a  burning 
fiery  furnace. 

^c.  2.  4.   6.21.   P.O.  13.  7.  vcr.  4,  5. 

revolted  at  it,  and  they  refused.  For  the 
probable  reasons  wh.v  Daniel  was  not  in- 
cluded in  the  number,  see  Note  on  ver.  12. 

9.  0  kinrj,  live  for  ever.  A  customary 
form  of  address  to  a  monarch,  implying 
that  long  life  was  regarded  as  an  eminent 
blessing.     See  Notes  on  eh.  ii.  4. 

10.  11.  Thou  lia-'it  made  a  decree,  &c. 
See  vs.  4,  5.  As  the  decree  included 
'every  man'  who  heard  the  sound  of  the 
music,  it  of  course  embraced  the  Jews, 
■whatever  religious  scruples  thej'  might 
have.  Whether  their  scruples,  however, 
were  known  at  the  time,  is  not  certain  ; 
or  whether  they  would  have  been  re- 
garded if  known,  is  no  more  certain. 

12.  There  are  certain  Jetcs  whom  thou 
hast  set  over  the  lirovince  of  Babylon, 
Shadracli,  Meshacli,  and  Ahed-nerjo.  Ch. 
ii.  49.  It  is  quite  remarkable  that  the 
name  of  Daniel  does  not  occur  in  the  re- 
cord of  this  transaction,  and  that  he  does 
not  appear  to  have  been  involved  in  the 
difiBculty.  Whij  he  was  not,  cannot  now 
be  certainly  known.  We  may  be  sure 
that  he  would  not  join  in  the  worship  of 
the  idol,  and  yet  it  would  seem,  as  Nebu- 
chadnezzar had  summoned  all  the  high 
officers  of  the  realm  to  be  present,  (ver.  2,) 
that  he  must  have  been  summoned  also. 
The  conjecture  of  Prideau.K  (Con.  I. 
222,)  is  not  improbable,  that  he  occupied  a 
place  of  so  much  influence  and  authority, 
and  enjoyed  in  so  high  degree  the  favour 
of  the  king,  that  they  did  not  think  it 
prudent  to  begin  with  him,  but  rather 
preferred  at  first  to  bring  the  accusation 
against  subordinate  officers.  If  they  were 
condemned  and  punished,  consistency 
3iight  require  that  he  should  be  punished 
also.  If  he  had  been  involved  at  first  in 
16* 


12  There  are  certain  Jews  wnom 
thou  hast  set  ''over  the  affairs  of 
the  province  of  Babylon,  Shadrach, 
Meshach,  and  Abcd-nego ;  these 
men,  0  king,  <=  have  not  regarded 
•^  thee  :  they  serve  not  thy  gods,  nor 
worship  the  golden  image  which 
thou  hast  set  up. 

13  Tl  Then  Nebucliadnczzar  in  Ids 
<=  rage  and  fury  commanded  to  bring 
Shadrach,  Meshacli,  and  Abed-nego. 
Then  they  brought  these  men  be- 
fore the  kinjc. 


be.  2.49. 
d  C.6.  Ic 


■=  set  no  regard  tipon. 
"  ver.  I'J. 


the  accusation,  his  high  rank,  and  his 
favour  with  the  king,  might  have  screened 
them  all  from  punishment.  It  is  possible, 
however,  that  Daniel  was  absent  on  tbo 
occasion  of  the  dedication  of  the  image. 
It  should  be  remembered  that  perhaps 
some  eighteen  years  had  elapsed  since  the 
transaction  referred  to  in  ch.  ii.  occurred, 
(See  Notes  on  ch.  iii.  1,)  and  Daniel  may 
have  been  employed  in  some  remote  part 
of  the  empire  on  public  business.  Comp. 
Intro,  to  the  chapter  ^  1,  VIII.  ^  These 
men,  0  kinr/,  have  not  regarded  thee. 
Marg.,  set  no  regard  upon.  Literally, 
'  they  have  not  placed  towards  thee  the 
decree  ;'  that  is,  they  have  not  made  any 
account  of  it ;  they  have  paid  no  attention 
to  it.  ^\  They  serve  not  thy  gods.  Perhaps 
it  was  inferred  from  the  fact  that  they 
would  not  pay  religious  homage  to  this 
idol,  that  they  did  not  serve  the  gods  at 
all  that  were  acknowledged  by  the  king; 
or  possibly  this  may  have  been  known 
from  what  had  occurred  before.  It  may 
have  been  well  understood  in  Babylon, 
that  the  Hebrews  worshipped  Jehovah 
only.  Now,  however,  a  case  had  occurred 
which  was  a  test  case,  whether  they  would 
on  any  account  render  homage  to  the 
idols  that  were  worshipped  in  Babylon. 
In  their  refusal  to  worship  the  idol,  it 
seemed  much  to  aggravate  the  offence, 
and  made  the  charge  much  more  serious, 
that  they  did  not  acknowledge  any  of  the 
gods  that  were  worshipped  in  Babj-lon. 
It  was  easy,  therefore,  to  persuade  the 
king  that  they  had  arrayed  themselves 
against  the  fundamental  laws  of  the 
realm. 

13.    Then   Nehuchadnezzar  in    his  rage 
and  fury.      The   word  rendersd  fury. 


18G 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  58a 


14  Nebuchadnezzar  spake  and 
said  unto  them,  Is  it  ^true,  0  Sha- 
drach,  Meshach,  and  Abcd-ncj2;o,  do 
not  ye  serve  my  godS;  nor  ■worship  the 
golden  image  which  I  have  set  up  ? 

15  Now  if  ye  be  ready  that  at 
what  time  ye  hear  the  sound  of  the 
cornet,  flute,  harp,  sackbut,  psaltery, 

»  or,  of  purpose,  as  Ex.  21. 13.  \>  Lu.  4.  7,  8. 

means  wrath.  Every  thing  tbat  wo  learn 
of  this  monarch  shows  that  he  was  a  man 
of  violent  passions,  and  that  he  was  easily- 
excited,  though  he  was  susceptible  also 
to  deep  impressions  on  religious  subjects. 
There  was  much  here  to  rouse  his  rage. 
His  command  to  worship  the  image  was 
positive.  It  extended  to  all  who  were 
summoned  to  its  dedication.  Their  re- 
fusal was  an  act  of  positive  disobedience, 
and  it  seemed  necessary  that  the  laws 
should  be  vindicated.  As  a  man  and  a 
monarch,  therefore,  it  was  not  unnatural 
that  the  anger  of  the  monarch  should 
be  thus  enkindled.  ^  Commanded  to 
Iring  Shadrach,  &c.  It  is  remarkable 
that  he  did  not  order  them  at  once  to  be 
slain,  as  he  did  the  magicians  who  could 
not  interpret  his  dream,  ch.  ii.  12.  This 
shows  that  he  had  some  respect  still  for 
these  men,  and  that  he  was  willing  to 
hear  what  they  could  say  in  their  defence. 
It  is  proper,  also,  to  recognize  the  provi- 
dence of  God  in  inclining  him  to  this 
course,  that  their  noble  reply  to  his  ques- 
tion might  be  put  on  record,  and  that  the 
full  power  of  religious  principle  might  be 
developed. 

14.  NehiicTiadnezzar  spal:e  and  said 
unto  tJirm,  Is  it  true.  Marg.,  '  of  purpose  ;' 
that  is,  have  you  done  this  intentionally? 
WinUe  renders  this,  'Is  it  insultingly?' 
Jacchiades  says  that  the  word  is  used  to 
denote  admiration  or  wonder,  as  if  the 
king  could  not  believe  that  it  was  possi- 
ble that  they  could  disregard  so  plain  a 
command,  when  disobedience  was  accom- 
panied with  such  a  threat.  De  Dieu  ren- 
<lers  it,  'Is  it  a  joke?'  That  is,  can  you 
possibly  be  serious  or  in  earnest  that  you 
disobey  so  positive  a  command?  Aben 
Ezra,  Theodotion,  and  Saadias,  render  it 
as  it  is  in  the  margin,  '  Have  you  done 
^his  of  set  purpose  and  design  ?'  as  if  the 
king  had  regarded  it  as  possible  that 
there  had  been  a  misunderstanding,  and 
M  if  be  was  not  unwilling  to  find  that 


and  dulcimer,  and  all  kinds  of  music, 
ye  fall  b  down  and  worship  the  im- 
nge  which  I  have  made  ;  "=  iceU:  but 
if  ye  worship  not,  ye  shall  be  cast 
the  same  hour  into  the  midst  of  %. 
burning  fiery  furnace ;  and  <J  who  ia 
that  God  that  shall  deliver  you  out 
of  my  hands  ? 

c  Ex.  32.  32.  Lu.  13.  9.    d  Ex.  5.  2.    2  Ki.  18, 35. 


they  could  make  an  apology  for  their 
conduct  The  Chaldee  word — X'jv — oc- 
curs nowhere  else.  It  is  rendered  by 
Gesenius,  purpose,  design.  That  is,  '  Is 
it  on  purpose  ?'  The  corresponding  He- 
brew word — ms — means  to  lie  in  wait, 
to  waylay,  Ex.  xxi.  13  ;  1  Sam.  xxiv.  11. 
Comp.  Num.  xxxv.  20,  22.  The  true 
meaning,  seems  to  be,  '  Is  it  your  de- 
termined purpose  ■not  to  worship  my  gods  ? 
Have  you  deliberately  made  up  your 
minds  to  this,  and  do  you  mean  to  abide 
by  this  resolution  ?'  That  this  is  the 
meaning,  is  apparent  from  the  fact  that 
he  immediately  proposes  to  try  them  on 
the  point,  giving  them  still  an  oppor- 
tunity to  comply  with  his  command  to 
worship  the  image  if  they  would,  or  to 
show  whether  they  were  finally  resolved 
not  to  do  it.  iy  Bo  not  ye  serve  my  gods? 
It  was  one  of  the  charges  against  them 
that  they  did  not  do  it,  ver.  12. 

15.  Now  if  ye  he  ready  that  at  what 
time,  &c.  At  the  very  time  ;  on  the  very 
instant.  It  would  seem  probable  from 
this  that  the  ceremonies  of  the  consecra- 
tion of  the  image  were  prolonged  for  a 
considerable  period,  so  that  there  was  still 
an  opportunity  for  them  to  unite  in  the 
service  if  they  would.  The  supposition 
that  such  services  would  be  continued 
through  several  days,  is  altogether  proba- 
ble, and  accords  with  what  was  usual  on 
festival  occasions.  It  is  remarkable  that 
the  king  was  willing  to  give  them  an- 
other trial  to  see  whether  they  were  dis- 
posed or  not  to  worship  the  golden  image. 
To  this  he  might  have  been  led  by  the 
apprehension  that  they  had  not  under- 
stood the  order,  or  that  they  had  not  duly 
considered  the  subject ;  and  possibly  by 
respect  for  them  as  faithful  officers,  and 
for  their  countryman  Daniel.  There 
seems,  moreover,  to  have  been  in  the 
bosom  of  this  monarch,  with  all  his  pride 
and  passion,  a  readiness  to  do  justice. 


B.  C.  580.] 


CHAPTER    III. 


187 


16  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed- 
nego,  answered  and  said  to  the  king, 
O  Nebuchadnezzar,  we  are  not  care- 
ful 'to  answer  thee  in  tliis  matter. 


»  Matt.  10. 19. 


and  to  furnish  an  opportunity  of  a  fair 
trial  before  he  proceeded  to  extremities. 
See  ch.  ii,  16,  26,  46,  47.  «[  And  who  is 
that  God  that  shall  deliver  you  out  of  my 
hands.  That  is,  he  either  supposed  that 
the  God  whom  they  adored  would  not 
be  able  to  deliver  them,  or  that  he  would 
not  be  disposed  to  do  it.  It  was  a  boast 
of  Sennacherib,  when  he  warred  against 
the  Jews,  that  none  of  the  gods  of  the 
nations  which  he  had  conquered  had 
been  able  to  rescue  the  lands  over  which 
they  presided,  and  he  argued  from  these 
premises  that  the  God  whom  the  Hebrews 
worshipped  would  not  be  able  to  defend 
their  country: — "Hath  any  of  the  gods 
of  the  nations  delivered  his  land  out  of 
the  hand  of  the  king  of  Assyria?  Where 
are  the  gods  of  Hamath,  and  of  Arphad? 
where  are  the  gods  of  Sepharvaim  ?  and 
have  they  delivered  Samaria  out  of  my 
hand?  Who  are  they  among  all  the  gods 
of  these  lands  that  have  delivered  their 
land  out  of  my  hand,  that  Jehovah 
should  deliver  Jerusalem  out  of  my 
hand?"  Isa.  xs.Kvi.  19 — 21.  Nebuchad- 
nezzar seems  to  have  reasoned  in  a  simi- 
lar manner,  and  with  a  degree  of  vain 
boasting  that  strongly  resembled  this, 
calling  their  attention  to  the  certain  de- 
struction which  awaited  them  if  they  did 
not  comply  with  his  demand. 

16.  Shadrach,  3Ieshach,  and  Ahed- 
nego,  ansicered  and  said  to  the  king. 
They  appear  to  have  answered  promptly, 
and  without  hesitation,  showing  that  they 
had  carefully  considered  the  subject,  and 
that  with  them  it  was  a  matter  of  settled 
and  intelligent  principle.  But  they  did 
it  in  a  respectful  manner,  though  they 
were  firm.  The}'  neither  reviled  the  mon- 
arch nor  his  gods.  They  used  no  re- 
proachful words  respecting  the  image 
which  he  had  set  up,  or  any  of  the  idols 
which  he  worshipped.  Nor  did  they  com- 
plain of  his  injustice  or  seventy.  They 
calmly  looked  at  thev-  own  dutj',  and  re- 
solved to  do  it,  leaviug  the  consequences 
■with  the  God  whom  they  worshipped. 
^  Wc  are  not  careful  to  answer  thee  in 
tits  matter.    The  word  rendered  careful 


17  If  it  be  so,  our  God  whom  bwe 
serve  is  able  to  deliver  us  from  the 
burning  fiery  furnace,  and  he  will 
deliver  tis  out  of  thy  hand,  0  kin"-. 

b  Ps.  121.  5,  7.    Ac.  27.  23,  25. 


— nc-n— means,  according  to  Gesenius,  to 
be  needed  or  necessary;  then,  to  have 
need.  The  Vulgate  renders  it,  non  opor- 
tet  nos — it  does  not  behoove  us  ;  it  is  not 
needful  for  us.  So  the  Greek,  oO  xpeiav 
exo/jcv — we  have  no  need.  So  Luther,  Es 
ist  Nichtnoth — there  is  not  necessity.  The 
meaning,  therefore,  is,  that  it  was  not 
necessary  that  they  should  reply  to  the 
king  on  that  point;  they  would  not  giv© 
themselves  trouble  or  solicitude  to  do  it. 
They  had  made  up  their  minds,  and  what- 
ever was  the  result,  they  could  not  wor- 
ship the  image  which  he  bad  set  up,  or 
the  gods  whom  he  adored.  They  felt  that 
there  was  no  necessity  for  stating  the  rea- 
sons why  they  could  not  do  this.  Per- 
haps they  thought  that  argument  in  their 
case  was  improper.  It  became  them  to 
do  their  duty,  and  to  leave  the  event  with 
God.  They  had  no  need  to  go  into  an 
extended  vindication  of  their  conduct,  for 
it  might  be  presumed  that  their  princi- 
ples of  conduct  were  well  known.  The 
state  of  mind,  therefore,  which  is  indi- 
cated by  this  passage,  is  that  their  minds 
were  made  up;  that  their  principles  were 
settled  and  well  understood ;  that  they  had 
come  to  the  deliberate  determination,  as  a 
matter  of  conscience,  not  to  yield  obedience 
to  the  command  ;  that  the  result  could  not 
be  modified  by  any  statement  which  they 
could  make,  or  by  any  argument  in  the 
case;  and  that,  therefore,  they  were  not 
au.xious  about  the  result,  but  calmly  com- 
mitted the  whole  cause  to  God. 

17.  If  it  be  so.  Chald.  >ri\v  ;n — so  it 
is.  That  is,  '  this  is  true,  that  the  God 
whom  we  serve  can  save  us.'  The  idea 
is  not,  as  would  seem  in  our  translation, 
'  if  we  are  to  be  cast  into  the  furnace,'  but 
the  mind  is  turned  on  the  fact  that  the 
God  whom  they  served  could  save  them. 
Coverdale  renders  this  whole  passage, 
"  0  Nebuchadnezzar,  we  ought  not  to 
consent  unto  thee  in  this  matter,  foi  why  ? 
our  God  whom  we  serve  is  able  to  keep 
us,"  &c.  •[  Our  God  whom  we  serve.  Gr. 
'  our  God  in  the  heavens,  whom  we  serve.' 
This  was  a  distinct  avowal  that  they  were 


188 


DANIEL 


[B.  C.  580. 


18  But  if  =1  not,  be  itkno-n-n  unto 
thee,  0  king,  that  wo  will  not  serve 
''thy  gods,  nor  worship  the  golden 
image  which  thou  hast  setup. 

10  ^  Then  was  Nebuchadnezzar 
'  full  of  <•  fury,  and  the  form  of  his 

I  Job  13. 15.  Ac.  4. 19.  ^Ex.  20.  3—5.  Le.  19.  4. 


the  servants  of  the  true  God,  and  they 
were  not  ashamed  to  avow  it,  whntever 
might  be  the  consequences.  ^  Is  able  to 
deliver  its  froii>  the  Itiirniiif/  fiery  furnace. 
This  was  evidently  said  in  reply  to  the 
question  asked  by  the  king  (ver.  15), 
"  Who  is  that  God  that  shall  dtliver  you 
out  of  my  hands  ?"  They  were  sure  that 
the  God  whom  they  worshipped  was  able, 
if  he  should  choose  to  do  it,  to  save  them 
from  death.  In  what  way  they  supposed 
he  could  save  them,  is  not  expressed. 
Probably  it  did  not  occur  to  them  that  he 
would  save  them  in  the  manner  in  which 
he  actually  did,  but  they  felt  that  it  was 
entirely  within  his  power  to  keep  them 
from  so  horrid  a  deatli  if  he  pleased.  The 
state  of  mind  indicated  in  this  verse,  is 
ilaa,toi  entire  covfidence  in  God.  Theiran- 
swershowed  (a)  that  they  lind  no  doubt  of 
his  ability  to  save  them  if  he  pleased  ; 
(6)  that  they  believed  he  would  do 
what  was  best  in  the  case;  and  (c)  that 
they  were  entirely  willing  to  commit  the 
whole  case  into  his  hands,  to  dispose  of 
it  as  he  chose.     Comp.  Isa.  xliii.  2. 

]8.  But  if  not.  That  is,  'if  he  should 
not  deliver  us ;  if  it  should  not  occur 
that  he  would  protect  us,  and  save 
us  from  that  heated  oven.  AVhatever 
may  be  the  result  in  regard  to  us,  our  de- 
termination is  settled.'  ^  Be  it  knoicn 
ttnto  thee,  0  kinr/,  that  toe  icill  not  serine 
thy  gods,  &c.  This  answer  is  firm  and 
noble.  It  showed  that  their  minds  were 
made  up,  and  that  it  was  with  them  a 
matter  of  principle  not  to  worship  false 
gods.  The  state  of  mind  which  is  de- 
noted by  this  verse,  is  that  of  a  determi- 
nation to  do  their  duty,  whatever  might  be 
the  consequences.  The  attention  was 
fixed  on  what  was  right,  not  on  what  would 
be  the  result.  The  sole  question  which 
was  asked  was,  what  ought  to  be  done  in 
the  case  ;  and  they  had  no  concern  about 
what  would  follow.  True  religion  is  a 
determined  purpose  to  do  right,  and  not 
to  do  wrong,  whatever  may  be  the  conse- 


visage  was  changed  against  Sha- 
drach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego : 
therefore  he  .spake,  and  commanded 
=  that  they  should  heat  the  furnace 
one  seven  times  more  than  it  was 
wont  to  be  heated. 

cfaied.        A  Is.  51.  1.3.     Lu.  12.  4.  5. 
e  Pr.  IG.  14.     21.  24.    27.  3,  4.' 


quences  in  either  case.  It  matters  not 
what  follows — wealth  or  poverty  ;  honour 
or  dishonour;  good  report  or  evil  report; 
life  or  death;  the  mind  is  firmly  fixed  on 
doingright,  and  not  on  doing  wrong.  This 
\sthe  religion  cf  principle  ;  and  when  we 
consider  the  circumstances  of  those  who 
made  this  reply;  when  we  remember  their 
comparative  youth,  and  the  few  opportu- 
nities which  they  had  for  instruction  in  the 
nature  of  religion,  and  that  they  were 
cnptives  in  a  distant  land,  and  that  they 
stood  before  the  most  absolute  monarch  of 
the  earth,  with  no  powerful  friends  to  sup- 
port them,  and  with  the  most  horrid  kind  of 
death  threatening  them,  we  may  well  ad- 
mire the  grace  of  that  God  who  could  so 
amply  furnish  them  for  such  a  trial,  and 
love  that  religion  which  enabled  them  te 
take  a  stand  so  noble  and  so  bold. 

19.  Then  teas  Nebuchadnezzar  full  of 
fury.  'Maxg..  filled.  He  was  exceedingly 
enraged.  He  evidently  was  not  prepared 
for  a  stand  so  firm  and  determined  on 
their  part,  and  he  did  not  appreciate  their 
motives,  nor  was  he  disposed  to  yield 
to  them  the  privilege  and  right  of  follow- 
ing their  honest  convictions.  He  was 
deeply  excited  with  anger  when  the  com- 
plaint was  made  that  they  would  not 
worship  his  gods  (ver.  13),  but  he  had 
hoped  that  possibly  they  had  not  un- 
derstood his  command,  and  that  what 
they  had  done  had  not  been  by  deliber- 
iite  purpose  (Notes  on  ver.  14) ;  and  he 
had  therefore  given  them  an  opportunity 
to  reconsider  the  subject,  and,  by  com- 
plying with  his  will,  to  save  themselves 
from  the  threatened  punishment.  Ho 
now  saw,  however,  that  what  they  had 
done  was  done  deliberatelj'.  He  saw  that 
they  firmly  and  intelligently  refused  to 
obey,  and  supposing  now  that  they  not 
only  rebelled  ag.ainst  his  commands,  but 
that  they  disregarded  and  de.'^pised  even 
his  forbearance  (ver.  15),  it  is  not  won- 
derful that  he  was  filled  with  wrath. 
What  was  with  them  fi:^ed  principle,  he 


B.  C.  580.] 


CHAPTER    III. 


189 


20  And  he  commanded  the  ^most 
mighty  men  that  toere  in  his  army 
to  bind  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and 
Abed-nego,  and  to  cast  them  into 
the  burning  fiery  furnace. 

:\ini0hlii  of  stiiinQlh. 

probably  regarded  as  more  ohstinacy,  and 
he  determined  to  punish  them  accord- 
ingly. IT  And  the  form  of  his  visar/e  was 
elianged.  As  the  face  usually  is  when 
men  become  excited  with  anger.  AVe 
may  suppose  that  up  to  this  point  he 
had  evinced  self-control ;  possibly  he  may 
have  shown  something  like  tenderness  or 
compassion.  He  was  indisposed  to  punish 
them,  and  he  hoped  that  they  would  save 
him  from  the  necessity  of  it  by  comply- 
ing with  his  commands.  Now  he  saw  j 
that  all  hope  of  this  was  vain,  and  he  ! 
gave  unrestrained  vent  to  his  angry  feel-  | 
ings.  ^  He  spake  and  commanded  that 
they  should  heat  the  furnace  one  seven 
times  more  than  it  was  wont  to  he  heated. 
Chald.,  '  Than  it  was  seen  to  be  heated;' 
that  is,  than  it  was  ever  seen.  The  word 
seven  here  is  a  perfect  number,  and  the 
meaning  is,  that  they  should  make  it  as 
hot  as  possible.  He  did  not  reflect  pro- 
bably that  by  this  command  he  was  con- 
tributing to  shorten  and  abridge  their 
sufferings.  AVicked  men,  who  are  vio- 
lently opposed  to  religion,  often  overdo 
the  matter,  and  by  their  haste  and  im- 
petuosity defeat  the  very  end  which  they 
have  in  view,  and  even  promote  the  very 
cause  which  they  wish  to  destro}'. 

20.  And  he  commanded  the  most  mighty 
men  that  were  in  his  army.  Marg.,  mighty 
of  strength.  Chald.  '  And  to  mighty  men, 
inigbty  men  of  strength  who  were  in 
his  army,  he  said.'  He  employed  the 
strongest  men  that  could  be  found  for 
this  purpose.  ^  To  hind  Shadrach,  &c. 
Gill  supposes  that  they  were  probably 
bound  together,  as  the  king  afterwards 
was  astonished  to  see  them  walking 
separately  in  the  furnace.  But  there  is 
no  certain  evidence  of  this,  and  in  itself 
it  is  not  very  probable.  It  is  well  re- 
marked by  Gill,  however,  that  there  was 
no  need  of  binding  them  at  all.  They 
would  have  made  no  resistance,  and  there 
was  no  danger  that  they  would  make  any 
effort  to  escape. 

21.  Then  these  men  icere  hound  in  their 
toats.      They  were  seized    just  as  they 


21  Then  these  men  -wore  bound 
in  their  ''coats,  their  hosen,  and 
their  "^hats,  and  their  other  gar- 
ments, and  were  cast  into  the  midst 
of  the  burning  fiery  furnace. 


bor,  manlles. 


•^  or,  turbans. 


were.  No  time  was  given  them  for  pre- 
paration ;  no  change  was  made  in  their 
dress.  In  auto-de-fes  of  later  times,  it 
has  been  usual  to  array  those  who  were 
to  suffer  in  a  peculiar  dress,  indicative  of 
the  fact  that  they  were  heretics,  and  that 
they  deserved  the  flame.  Here,  how- 
ever, the  anger  of  the  king  was  so  great, 
that  no  delay  was  allowed  for  any  such 
purpose,  and  they  proceeded  to  execute 
the  sentence  upon  them  just  as  they  were. 
The  fact  that  they  were  thus  thrown  into 
the  furnace,  however,  only  made  the 
miracle  the  more  conspicuous,  since  not 
even  their  garments  were  affected  by  the 
fire.  The  word  rendered  coats,  is  in  the 
margin  rendered  manlles.  The  Chaldee 
word — r'??"'? — means,  according  to  Gese- 
nius,  the  long  and  wide  pantaloons  which 
are  worn  by  the  Orientals,  from  Sai?  — 
sarhel,  to  cover.  The  Greek  word  used 
in  the  translation  is  derived  from  this — 
aapajJapa^  and  the  word  aapPapiSci  is  still 
used  in  modern  Greek.  The  Chaldee 
word  is  used  only  in  this  chapter.  Tho 
Vulgate  renders  this  cum  hraccis  suis — 
hence  the  word  breeches,  and  brogues.  The 
garment  referred  to,  therefore,  seems 
rather  to  be  that  which  covered  the  lower 
part  of  their  person  than  either  a  coat  or 
mantle.  ^  Their  hosen.  This  word  was 
evidently  designed  by  our  translators  to  de- 
note drawers,  ortrowsers — not  stockings, 
for  that  was  the  common  meaning  of  the 
word  when  the  translation  was  made.  It 
is  not  probable  that  the  word  is  designed 
to  denote  stockings,  as  they  are  not 
commonly  worn  in  the  East.  Ilarmor 
supposes  that  the  word  here  used  means 
properly  a  hammer,  and  that  the  refer- 
ence is  to  a  hammer  that  was  carried  as 
a  sj'uibol  of  office,  and  he  refers  in  illus- 
tration of  this  to  the  plates  of  Sir  John 
Chardin  of  carvings  found  in  the  ruin* 
of  Persepolis,  among  which  a  man  is  re- 
presented with  a  hammer  or  mallet  in 
each  hand.  He  supposes  that  this  was 
some  symbol  of  office.  The  more  conu 
mon  and  just  representation,  however,  ia 


190 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  580 


22  Therefore  because  the  king's 
»  commandment  was  urgent,  and  the 
furnace  exceeding  hot,  the  ''flame 
of  the   fire  slew   those    <=  men  that 

a  word.  ^  or,  spark.  c  G.  24. 


to  regard  tbis  as  referring  to  an  article 
of  dress.  The  Chaldee  word — '^'^'i^p  — 
pattlsh,  is  from  C'as  — patash,  to  break, 
to  hammer  (jrarao-trto) ;  to  spread  out,  to 
expand;  and  the  noun  means  (1)  a  ham- 
mer, Isa.  xli.  7 ;  Jer.  xxiii.  29,  1.  53, 
and  (2)  a  garment,  probably  with  the  idea 
of  its  being  sjn-ead  out,  and  perhaps  re- 
ferring to  a  tunic  or  under-garuient. 
Comp.  Gesenius  on  the  word.  The  Greek 
is,  nifats,  and  so  the  Latin  Vulgate, 
tiaris :  the  tiara,  or  covering  for  the 
head,  turban.  The  probable  reference, 
however,  is  to  the  under  garment  worn 
by  the  Orientals ;  the  tunic,  not  a  little 
resembling  a  shirt  with  us.  *|  And  their 
hats.  Marg.,  or  turbans.  The  Chaldee 
word — n'^^id — is  rendered  by  Gesenius 
mantle,  pallium.  So  the  version  called  the 
'breeches'  Bible,  renders  it  clokes.  Cover- 
daJe  renders  it  shoes,  and  so  the  Vulgate 
calceamentis,  sandals ;  and  the  Greek 
irepixynniaii' — greaves,  or  a  garment  en- 
closing the  lower  limbs ;  pantaloons. 
There  is  certainly  no  reason  for  render- 
ing the  word  hats — as  hats  were  then  un- 
known ;  nor  is  there  any  evidence  that 
it  refers  to  a  turban.  Buxtorf,  (Chald. 
Lex.)  regards  it  as  meaning  a  garment, 
particularly  an   outer  garment,  a  cloak, 


and   tbis   is   probably  the   correct   idea. 
VTe  should  then  have  in  these  three  words 


took    up    Shadrach,  Meshach,  and 
Abed-nego. 

23  And    these    three  men,  Shar 
drach,    Meshach,    and    Abed-nego 


the  principal  articles  of  dress  in  which 
the  Orientals  appear,  as  is  shown  by  the 
cut,  from  the  ruins  of  Persepolis — tho 
large  and  loose  trowsers;  the  tunic,  ov 
inner  garment ;  and  the  outer  garment, 
or  cloak,  that  was  commonly  thrown  ovei 
all.  ^  And  their  other  garments.  AVhat- 
ever  they  had  on,  whether  turban,  belt, 
sandals,  &c. 

22.  Therefore  because  the  Jcing's  eom- 
mandment  was  urgent.  Marg.,  as  in  Chald., 
v:ord.  The  meaning  is,  that  the  king 
would  admit  of  no  delay  ;  he  urged  on 
the  execution  of  his  will,  even  at  the 
imminent  peril  of  those  who  were  cn- 
tnisted  with  the  execution  of  his  com- 
mand, "i  And  the  furnace  exceeding  hot. 
Probably  so  as  to  send  out  the  flame  so 
far  as  to  render  the  approach  to  it  dan- 
gerous. The  urgency  of  the  king  would 
not  admit  of  any  arrangements,  even  if 
there  could  have  been  any,  by  which  the 
approach  to  it  would  be  safe.  '^  The  flame 
of  the  fire  slew  those  men.  Marg.,  as  in 
Chaldee,  spark.  The  meaning  is,  what 
the  fire  threw  out — the  blaze,  tho  heat. 
Nothing  can  be  more  probable  than  this. 
It  was  necessary  to  approach  to  the  very 
mouth  of  the  furnace  in  order  to  cast 
them  in,  and  it  is  very  conceivable  that 
a  heated  furnace  would  belch  forth  such 
flames,  or  throw  out  such  an  amount  of 
heat,  that  this  could  not  be  done  but  at 
the  peril  of  life.  The  Chaldee  word  ren- 
dered slew  here,  means  Icilled.  It  does 
not  mean  merely  that  they  were  over- 
come with  the  heat,  but  that  they  actually 
died.  To  expose  these  men  thus  to  death 
was  an  act  of  great  cruelty,  but  we  are 
to  remember  how  absolute  is  the  charac- 
ter of  an  Oriental  despot,  and  how  much 
enraged  this  king  was,  and  how  regard- 
less such  a  man  would  be  of  any  efi"ects 
on  others  in  the  execution  of  his  own 
wiU. 

23.  And  these  three  men — fell  dotm 
bound,  &o.  That  is,  the  flame  did  not 
loosen  the  cords  by  which  they  had  been 
fastened.  The  fact  that  they  were  seen 
to  fall  into  the  furnace  bound,  made  the 
miracle  the  more  remarkable  that  the7 


B.  C.  580.] 


CHAPTER    III 


191 


fell  down  bound  into  the  midst  of  » counsellors,  Did  not  -we  cast  three 


the  burning  fiery  furnace. 

24  1[  Then  Kebuchadnezzar  the 
king  -was  astonied,  and  rose  up  in 
haste,  and  spake,  and  said  unto  his 


dhould  be  seen  walking  loose  in  the  midst 
of  the  fire. 

In  the  Septuagint,  Syriac,  Arabic,  and 
Latin  Vulgate,  there  follow  in  this  place 
sixty-eight  verses,  containing  "  The  Song 
of  the  Three  Holy  Children."  This  is  not 
in  the  Chaldee,  and  its  origin  is  unknown. 
It  is  with  entire  propriety  placed  in  the 
Apocrypha,  as  being  no  part  of  the  in- 
spired canon.  With  some  things  that 
are  improbable  and  absurd,  the  '  song' 
contains  many  things  that  are  beautiful, 
and  that  would  be  highly  appropriate  if 
a  song  had  been  uttered  at  all  in  the  fur- 
nace. 

24.  Then  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  was 
astonied.  The  word  astonied,  which 
occurs  several  times  in  our  translation, 
(Ezra  ix.  3;  Job  xvii.  S,  xviii.  20;  Ezek. 
iv.  17;  Dan.  iii.  2-i,  iv.  19,  v.  9,)  is  but 
another  form  for  astonished,  and  ex- 
presses wonder  or  amazement.  The  rea- 
sons of  the  wonder  here  were  that  the 
men  who  were  bound  when  cast  into  the 
furnace  were  seen  alive,  and  walking  un- 
bound ;  that  to  them  a  fourth  person  was 
added,  walking  with  them  ;  and  that  the 
fourth  had  the  appearance  of  a  divine 
personage.  It  would  seem  from  this,  that 
the  furnace  was  so  made  that  one  could 
conveniently  see  into  it,  and  also  that  the 
king  remained  near  to  it  to  witness  the 
result  of  the  execution  of  his  own  order. 
^[  And  rose  up  in  haste.  He  would  na- 
turally express  his  surprise  to  his  coun- 
sellors, and  ask  an  explanation  of  the 
remarkable  occurrence  which  he  wit- 
nessed. ^  And  sjjake,  and  said  unto 
his  counsellors.  Marg.,  governors.  The 
word  used  —  T'i^th  —  occurs  only  here 
and  in  ver.  27,  ch.  iv.  36,  vi.  7.  It  is 
rendered  counsellors  in  each  case.  The 
Vulgate  renders  i^optimatibus ;  the  Ixx. 
fitytaraaiv — his  nobles,  or  distinguished 
men.  The  word  would  seem  to  mean 
those  who  were  .luthorized  to  speak  (from 
13T  ) ;  that  is,  those  authorized  to  give 
couniel;  ministers  of  state,  viziers,  cabi- 
net-counsellors. ^  Did  not  ice  cast  three 
Kun  b^iund,  Ac.     The  emphasis  hero  is 


men  bound  into  the  midst  of  the 
fire  ?  They  answered  and  said  unto 
the  king,  True,  0  king. 

25  lie  answered  and  said,  Lo,  I 
»  or,  governors. 


on  the  words  three,  and  bound.  It  was 
now  a  matter  of  astonishment  that  there 
were  four,  and  that  they  were  all  loose. 
It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  Nebuchad- 
nezzar had  any  doubt  on  this  subject,  or 
that  his  recollection  had  so  soon  failed 
him,  but  this  manner  of  introducing  the 
subject  is  adopted  in  order  to  fix  the 
attention  strongly  on  the  fact  to  which 
he  was  about  to  call  their  attention,  and 
which  was  to  him  so  much  a  matter  of 
surprise. 

25.  He  answered  and  said,  Lo,  I  see 
four  men  loose.  From  the  fact  that  he 
saw  these  men  now  loose,  and  that  this 
filled  him  with  so  much  surprise,  it  may 
be  presumed  that  they  had  been  bound 
with  something  that  was  not  combustible 
— with  some  sort  of  fetters  or  chains.  In 
that  case,  it  would  be  a  matter  of  surprise 
that  they  should  be  loose,  even  though 
they  could  survive  the  action  of  the  fire. 
The  fourth  personage  now  so  mysteri- 
ously added  to  their  number,  it  is  evident 
assumed  the  appearance  of  a  man,  and 
not  the  appearance  of  a  celestial  being, 
though  it  was  the  aspect  of  a  man  so  no- 
ble and  majestic  that  he  deserved  to  be 
called  a  son  of  God.  IT  V/alking  in  the 
midst  of  the  fire.  The  furnace,  therefore, 
was  large,  so  that  those  who  were  in  it 
could  walk  about.  The  vision  must  have 
been  sublime;  and  it  is  a  beautiful  image 
of  the  children  of  God  often  walking  un- 
hurt amidst  dangers,  safe  beneath  the 
divine  protection.  ^  And,  they  have  no 
hurt.  Marg.,  There  is  no  hurt  in  them. 
They  walk  unharmed  amidst  the  flames. 
Of  course  the  king  judged  in  this  only 
from  appearances,  but  the  result  (ver.  27) 
showed  that  it  was  really  so.  ^  And  the 
form  of  the  fourth.  Chaldee,  nn  —  hio 
appearance  (from  HNT,  to  see);  that  is, 
he  seemed  to  be  a  son  of  God ;  he  looked 
like  a  son  of  God.  The  word  does  not 
refer  to  anything  special  or  peculiar  in 
his  form  or  figure,  but  it  may  be  supposed 
to  denote  something  that  was  noble  or 
majestic  in  his  mien ;  something  in  bia 
countenance  and  demeanour  that  declared 


192 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  580, 


see  four  men  loose,  walking  »  in  the  no  hurt ;  and  the  form  of  the  fourth 
midst  of  tlie  fire,  ^  and    they  have 


b  thei-e  is  no  hurt  in  them. 


him  to  be  of  heavenly  origin.  %  Like  the 
Son  of  God.  There  are  two  inquiries  which 
arise  in  regard  to  this  expression  :  one 
is,  what  was  the  idea  denoted  by  the 
phrase  as  used  by  the  king,  or  who  did 
he  talie  this  personage  to  be  ?  the  other, 
who  he  actually  was?  In  regard  to 
the  former  inquiry,  it  may  be  observed, 
that  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  king 
referred  to  him  to  whom  this  title  is  so 
frequently  applied  in  the  New  Testament, 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  This  is  clear  (1) 
because  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that 
the  king  had  antj  knowledge  whatever 
that  there  would  bo  on  earth  one  to 
whom  this  title  might  be  appropriately 
given ;  (2)  there  is  no  evidence  that  the 
title  was  then  commonly  given  to  the 
Messiah  by  the  Jews,  or,  if  it  was,  that 
the  king  of  Babylon  was  so  versed  in 
Jewish  theology  as  to  be  acquainted  with 
it;  and  (3)  the  language  which  he  uses 
does  not  necessarily  imply  that,  even  if 
he  were  acquainted  with  the  fact  that 
there  was  a  prevailing  expectation  that 
such  a  being  would  appear  on  the 
earth  he  designed  so  to  use  it.  The 
insertion  of  the  article  '  the,'  which 
is  not  in  the  Chaldee,  gives  a  differ- 
ent impression  from  what  the  original 
would  if  literally  interpreted.  There  is 
nothing  in  the  Chaldee  to  limit  it  to  any 
'  son  of  God,'  or  to  designate  any  one  to 
whom  that  term  could  be  applied  as  pe- 
culiarly intended.  It  would  seem  pro- 
bable that  our  translators  meant  to  convey 
the  idea  that  'the  Son  of  God'  peculiarly 
was  intended,  and  doubtless  thej'  regarded 
this  as  one  of  his  appearances  to  men 
before  his  incarnation  ;  but  it  is  clear  that 
no  such  conception  entered  into  the  mind 
of  the  king  of  Babylon.  The  Chaldee  is 
simply,  iv-iSw-njS  '^^p,t  'like  to  a,  son  of 
God,'  or  to  a  son  of  the  gods — as  the 
word  \-'7-hH  —  Elohin  (Chald.),  or  Elohim 
(Heb.),  though  often,  and  indeed  usually 
applied  to  the  true  God,  is  in  the  plural 
number,  and  in  the  mouth  of  a  heathen 
ivould  properly  be  used  to  denote  the 
gods  that  he  worshipped.  The  article  is 
cot  prefixed  to  the  word  '  son,'  and  the 
language  would  apply  to  any  one  who 
might  properly  be  called  a  son  of  God. 


is  like  the  ^  Son  of  God. 

=  Prov.  30.  4.        Lu.  1.  35.        Eo.  1.  i. 


The  Vulgate  has  literally  rendered  it 
'like  to  a  sou  of  God' — semilia  Jilio 
Dei;  the  Greek  in  the  same  way — 
Ofioi'a  vl'2  Stou;  the  Syriac  is  like  the  Chal- 
dee ;  Castellio  renders  it,  quartus  formam 
habet  Deo  nati  similem — 'the  fourth  has 
a  form  resembling  one  born  of  God ;'  Cov- 
erdale,  'the  fourth  is  like  an  angel  to 
look  upon ;'  Luther,  more  definitely,  und 
der  vierte  ist  gleich,  als  ware  er  ein  Sohn 
der  Gotter — '  and  the  fourth  as  if  he  might 
be  a  son  of  the  gods.'  It  is  clear  that 
the  authoi'S  of  none  of  the  other  ver- 
sions had  the  idea  which  our  translators 
supposed  to  be  convej'ed  by  the  text,  and 
which  implies  that  the  Babylonian  mon- 
arch siijiposcd  that  the  person  whom  ho 
saw  was  the  one  who  afterwards  became 
incarnate  for  our  redemption.  In  accord- 
ance with  the  common  well  known  usage 
of  the  word  son  in  the  Hebrew  and  Chal- 
dee languages,  it  would  denote  any  one 
who  had  a  resemhlance  to  another,  and 
would  be  applied  to  any  being  who  was  of 
a  majestic  or  dignified  ajipearance,  and 
who  seemed  worthy  to  be  ranked  among 
the  gods.  It  was  usual  among  the  hea- 
then to  suppose  that  the  gods  often  ap- 
peared in  a  human  form,  and  probably 
Nebuchadnezzar  regarded  this  as  some 
such  celestial  appearance.  If  it  be  sup- 
posed that  he  regarded  it  as  some  mani- 
testation  connected  with  the  Hebrew  form 
of  religion,  the  most  that  would  probably 
occur  to  him  would  be,  tiiat  it  was  some 
angelic  being  appearing  now  for  the  pro- 
tection of  these  worshippers  of  Jehovah. 
But  a  second  inquiry,  and  one  that  is  not 
so  easily  answered,  in  regard  to  this  mys- 
terious personage,  arises.  Who  in  fact 
icas  this  being  that  appeared  in  the  fur- 
nace for  the  protection  of  these  three 
persecuted  men?  Was  it  an  angel,  or 
was  it  the  second  person  of  the  Trinity, 
the  Son  of  God?  That  this  was  the  Son 
of  God — the  second  person  of  the  Trinity, 
who  afterwards  became  incarnate,  has 
been  quito  a  common  opinion  of  exposi- 
tors. So  it  was  held  by  Tertullian,  by 
Augustine,  and  by  Hilar}',  among  the 
Fathers;  and  so  it  has  been  held  by  Gill, 
Clarius,  and  others  among  the  mod- 
erns.    Of   those   who  have  maintained 


B.  C.  580.] 


CHAPTER    III. 


103 


that  it  was  Christ,  some  have  supposed 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  had  been  made  .ac- 
quainted with  the  belief  of  the  Hebrews 
in  regard  to  the  Messiah ;  others,  that  he 
spoke  under  the  influenoe  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  without  being  fully  aware  of  what 
his  words  importL'd,  as  Caiaphas,  Saul, 
Pilate,  and  others  have  done.  Poole, 
Sijn.  The  Jewish  writers,  Jarchi,  Saa- 
diah,  and  Jaechides,  suppose  that  it  was 
an  angel,  called  a  son  of  God  in  accord- 
ance with  the  usual  custom  in  the  Scrip- 
tures. That  tliis  latter  is  the  correct 
opinion,  will  appear  evident,  though  there 
cannot  be  exact  certainty,  from  the  fol- 
lowing considerations :  (1)  The  language 
used  implies  necessarily  nothing  more. 
Though  it  mir/Jit  indeed  be  applicable  to 
the  Messiah — the  second  person  of  the 
Trinit}-,  if  it  could  be  determined  from 
other  sources  that  it  was  he,  yet  there  is 
nothing  in  the  language  which  necessa- 
rily suggests  this.  (2)  In  the  explanation 
of  the  matter  by  Nebuchadnezzar  him- 
self (ver.  28),  he  understood  it  to  bo  an 
angel — ''Blessed  be  the  God  of  Shadrach, 
&c.,  ivlio  hath  sent  his  aiirje/,"  &c.  This 
shows  that  he  had  had  no  other  view  of 
the  subject,  and  that  he  had  no  higher 
knowledge  in  the  case  than  to  suppose 
that  he  was  an  angel  of  God.  The  know- 
ledge of  the  existence  of  angels  was  so 
common  among  the  ancients,  that  there 
is  no  improbability  in  supposing  that  Ne- 
buchadnezzar was  sufficiently  instructed 
on  this  point  to  know  that  they  were  sent 
for  the  protection  of  the  good.  (3)  The 
belief  that  it  was  an  angel  accords  with 
what  we  find  elsewhere  in  this  book 
(comp.  ch.  vi.  22,  vii.  10,  ix.  21),  and  in 
other  places  in  the  sacred  scriptures,  re- 
specting their  being  employed  to  protect 
and  defend  the  children  of  God.  Comp. 
Ps.  xxxiv.  7,  xci.  11,  12;  Matt,  xviii.  10  ; 
Luke  xvi.  22  ;  Heb.  i.  14.  (4)  It  may  be 
added,  that  it  should  not  be  supposed 
that  it  was  the  Son  of  God  in  the  peculiar 
sense  of  that  term  without  positive  evi- 
dence, and  such  evidence  does  not  exist. 
Indeed,  there  is  scarcely  a  probability 
that  it  was  so.  If  the  Redeemer  ap- 
peared on  this  occasion,  it  cannot  be  ex- 
plained why,  in  a  ease  equally  important 
and  perilous,  he  did  not  appear  to  Daniel 
whoa  cast  into  the  lions'den  (ch.  vi.  22)  ; 
^nd  as  Daniel  then  attributed  his  deliv- 
erance to  the  intervention  of  an  angel, 
ihere  is  every  reason  why  the  same  ex- 


planation  should  be  given  of  this  passage. 
As  to  the  probability  that  an  angel  would 
be  employed  on  an  occasion  like  this,  if 
may  be  observed,  that  it  is  in  accordance 
with  the  uniform  representation  of  the 
scriptures,  and  with  what  wo  know  to  be 
a  great  law  of  the  universe.  The  weak, 
the  feeble,  and  those  who  arc  in  danger, 
are  protected  by  those  who  are  strong; 
and  there  is,  in  itself,  no  more  improba- 
bility in  the  supposition  that  an  aiif/el 
would  be  employed  to  work  a  miracle 
than  there  is  that  a  man  would  be.  We 
are  not  to  suppose  that  the  angel  was  able 
to  prevent  the  usual  effect  of  lire  by  any 
natural  strength  of  his  own.  The  miracle 
in  the  case,  like  all  other  miracles,  was 
wrought  by  the  power  of  God.  At  the 
same  time,  the  presence  of  the  angel 
would  bcTa  pledge  of  the  divine  protec- 
tion ;  would  be  an  assurance  that  the 
effect  produced  was  not  from  any  natural 
cause  ;  would  furnish  an  easy  explanation 
of  so  remarkable  an  occurrence ;  and, 
perhaps  more  than  all,  would  impress  the 
Babylonian  monarch  and  his  court  with 
some  just  views  of  the  divine  nature,  and 
with  the  truth  of  the  religion  which  was 
professed  by  those  whom  he  had  cast 
into  the  flames.  As  to  the  probability 
that  a  miracle  would  be  wrought  on  an 
occasion  like  this,  it  may  be  remarked  that 
a  more  appropriate  occasion  for  working  a 
miracle  could  scarcely  be  conceived.  At 
a  time  when  the  true  religion  was  perse. 
cuted  ;  at  the  court  of  the  most  powerful 
heathen  monarch  in  the  world  ;  when  the 
temple  at  Jerusalem  was  destroyed,  and 
the  lires  on  the  altars  had  been  put  out, 
and  the  people  of  God  were  exiles  in  a 
distant  land,  nothing  was  more  probable 
than  that  God  would  give  to  his  people  soma 
manifest  tokens  of  his  presence,  and  some 
striking  confirmation  of  the  truth  of  his 
religion.  There  has  perhaps  never  been 
an  occasion  when  we  should  more  cer- 
tainly expect  the  evidences  of  the  divine 
inteqjosition  than  during  the  exile  of  his 
people  in  Babylon  ;  and  during  their  long 
captivity  there  it  is  not  easy  to  conceive 
of  an  occasion  on  which  such  an  interpo- 
sition would  be  more  likelj'  to  occur  than 
when,  in  the  very  presence  of  the  mon- 
arch and  his  court,  three  youths  of  emi- 
nent devotedness  to  the  cause  of  God 
were  cast  into  a  burning  furnace,  6c- 
cause  they  steadfastly  refused  to  dislionouj 
him. 


194 


DANIEL. 


pB.  C.  580. 


26  Then  Nebuchadnezzar  came 
near  to  the  *  mouth  of  the  burning 
fiery  furnace,  aiid  spake,  and  said, 
Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abod-nego, 
ye  "^  servants  of  the  most  high  c  God, 
come  forth,  and  come  hither.  Then 
Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Aljed-nego, 
came  forth  of  the  midst  of  the  fire. 

27  And  the  princes,  governors, 
and  captains,  and  the  king's  coun- 
sellors, being  gathered  together,  saw 

*door.         bGa.  1.  10.  cGe.  14.  IS. 

dls.  43.  2.    He.  11.  34. 

26.  Tlicn  Nehucliadnezzar  came  near 
the  mouth,  <tc.  Marg.,  door.  The  Chal- 
dee  word  means  door,  gate,  entrance. 
The  form  of  the  furnace  is  unknown. 
There  was  a  place,  however,  through 
which  the  fuel  was  cast  into  it,  and  this 
is  doubtless  intended  by  the  word  door 
or  mouth  here  used.  ^  Ye  servants  of  the 
most  hirjh  God.  They  had  professed  to 
be  his  servants ;  he  now  saw  that  they 
were  acknowledged  as  such.  The  phrase 
'  most  high  God'  implies  that  he  regarded 
him  as  supremo  over  all  other  gods, 
though  it  is  probable  that  he  still  retained 
his  belief  in  the  existence  of  inferior 
divinities.  It  was  much,  however,  to 
secure  the  acknowledgment  of  the  mon- 
arch of  the  capital  of  the  heathen  world, 
that  the  God  whom  they  adored  was  su- 
preme. The  phrase  '  most  high  God'  is 
not  often  cmploj'ed  in  the  Scriptures,  but 
in  every  instance  it  is  used  as  an  appel- 
lation of  the  true  God.  ^  Come  forth  and 
come  hither.  The  reasons  which  seem  to 
have  influenced  this  singular  monarch  to 
recall  the  sentence  passed  on  them,  and 
to  attempt  to  punish  them  no  further, 
seem  to  have  been,  that  he  had  some 
remains  of  conscience  ;  that  he  was  ac- 
customed to  pay  respect  to  what  he 
regarded  as  God ;  and  that  he  now  saw 
evidence  that  a  true  God  was  there. 

27.  And  the  princes,  r/overnors,  and 
ca20ta{iis.  Notes,  ver.  3.  '[\  And  the  king's 
counsellors.  Notes,  ver.  24.  •[  Beinr/ 
tjnthered  together,  saro  these  men.  There 
could  be  no  mistake  about  the  reality  of 
the  miracle.  They  came  out  as  they 
were  cast  in.  There  could  have  been  no 
trick,  no  art,  no  legerdemain,  by  which 
they  could  have  been  preserved  and  re- 
Bt">red.  If  the  facts  occurred  as  they  are 
ttated  here,  then  there  can  be  no  doubt  i 


these  men,  upon  whose  bodies  the 
fire  had  ^  no  power,  nor  was  a  hair 
of  their  head  singed,  neither  were 
their  coats  changed,  nor  the  smell 
of  fire  had  passed  on  them. 

28  Then  Nebuchadnezzar  spake, 
and  said.  Blessed  he  the  God  of  Sha- 
drach, Meshach,  and  Abed-nego, 
who  hath  sent  his  'angel,  and  de- 
livered his  servants  that  trusted  ^  in 
him,  and  have  changed  the  king's 

«Go.  19.  15, 16.    Ps.  34.  7,  8;  103. 20.    He.  1.14. 
f  Je.  17.  7.   c.  6.  22,  23. 

that  this  was  a  real  miracle.  ^  Upon 
whose  bodies  the  fire  had  no  power.  That 
is,  the  usual  power  of  fire  on  the  human 
body  was  prevented.  ^  Nor  u-as  a  hair 
of  their  head  singed.  That  which  would 
be  most  likely  to  have  burned.  The  de- 
sign is  to  show  that  the  fire  had  produced 
absolutely  no  effect  on  them.  *[  Neither 
were  their  coats  changed.  On  the  word 
coats,  see  Notes  on  ver.  21.  The  word 
changed,  means  that  there  was  no  change 
caused  by  the  fire  either  in  their  colour 
or  their  texture.  ^  Nor  had  the  smell  of 
fire  23assed  on  them.  Not  the  slightest 
effect  had  been  produced  by  the  fire,  not 
even  so  much  as  to  occasion  the  smell 
caused  by  fire  when  cloth  is  singed  or 
burned.  Perhaps,  however,  sulphur  or 
pitch  had  been  used  in  heating  the  fur- 
nace, and  the  idea  may  be,  that  their 
preservation  had  been  so  entire  that  not 
even  the  smell  of  the  smoke  caused  by 
those  combustibles  could  be  perceived. 

2S.  Then  Nebuchadnezzar  spake,  and 
said,  Blessed  be  the  God  of  Shadrach,  &c. 
On  the  characteristic  of  mind  thus  evinced 
by  this  monarch,  see  the  Notes  and  Prac- 
tical Remarks  on  ch.  ii.  46,  47.  ^  Which 
hath  sent  his  angel.  This  proves  that  the 
king  regarded  this  mysterious  fourth  per- 
sonage as  an  angel,  and  that  he  used  the 
phrase  (ver.  25,)  'is  like  the  son  of  God,' 
only  in  that  sense.  That  an  angel  should 
be  employed  on  an  embassage  of  this 
kind,  we  have  seen  is  in  accordance  with 
the  current  statements  of  the  Scriptures. 
Comp.  E.xcursas  I.  to  Prof.  Stuart  on  the 
Apocalypse.  See  also  Luke  i.  11 — 20,  26 — • 
38;  Matt.  i.  20,  21,  ii.  13,  19,  20,  iv.  11, 
xviii.  10:  Acts  xii.  7 — 15;  Gen.  xxxii. 
1,  2  ;  2  Kings  vi.  17;  Ex.  xiv.  19,  xxiii. 
20,  xxxiii.  2;  Num.  xx.  16;  Josh.  v.  13; 
Isa.  Ixiii.  9  ;  Dan.  x.  5—13,  20,21,  xii.  ]. 


B.  C  580.] 


CHAPTER   III. 


195 


word,  and  yielded  their  i  bodies, 
that  they  might  not  serve  nor  wor- 
ship any  God,  except  their  own  God. 
29  Therefore  1 1  mtikc  a  ''  decree. 
That  every  people,  nation,  and  lan- 


»Ro.  12.:.  He.  11. 


h  a  decree  is  made  by  me. 


^  And  have  changed  the  king's  word. 
Th.it  is,  his  purpose  or  command.  Their 
conduct,  and  the  divine  protection  in 
consequence  of  their  conduct,  had  had  the 
eflect  wholly  to  change  his  purpose  to- 
wards them.  lie  had  resolved  to  destroy 
them:  he  now  resolved  to  honour  them. 
This  is  referred  to  by  the  monarch  him- 
self as  a  remarkable  result,  as  indeed  it 
was — that  an  eastern  despot  who  had  re- 
solved on  the  signal  punishment  of  any 
of  his  subjects  should  be  so  entirely 
changed  in  his  purposes  towards  them. 
^  And  yielded  their  bodies.  The  Greek 
adds  here  ti't  n'p — '  to  the  fire.'  So  the 
Arabic.  This  is  doubtless  the  sense  of 
the  passage.  The  meaning  is,  that  rather 
than  bow  down  to  worship  gods  which 
they  regarded  as  no  gods ;  rather  than 
violate  their  consciences  and  do  wrong, 
they  had  preferred  to  be  cast  into  the 
flames,  committing  themselves  to  the 
protection  of  God.  It  is  implied  here 
that  they  had  done  this  voluntarily,  and 
that  they  might  easily  have  avoided  it  if 
they  had  chosen  to  obey  the  king.  He 
had  given  them  time  to  deliberate  on  the 
subject  (vs.  14,  15,)  and  he  knew  that 
they  had  resolved  to  pursue  the  course 
which  they  did  from  principle,  no  matter 
what  might  be  the  results,  vs.  IG — 18. 
This  strength  of  principle  ;  this  obedience 
to  the  dictates  of  conscience  ;  this  de- 
termination not  to  do  wrong  at  any 
hazard,  he  could  not  but  respect;  and 
this  is  a  remarkable  inst.ance  to  show  that 
a  firm  and  steady  course  in  doing  what 
is  right,  xoill  command  the  respect  of 
even  wicked  men.  This  monarch,  with 
all  his  pridt,  and  haughtiness,  and 
tyranny,  had  not  a  few  generous  quali- 
ties, and  some  of  the  finest  illustrations 
of  human  nature  were  furnished  by  him. 
^  Tluit  they  might  not  serve  nor  tcorship 
any  God,  excejjt  their  own  God.  They 
gave  up  their  bodies  to  the  flame  rather 
than  do  this. 

29.  Therefore  I  make  a  decree.  Marg., 
A  decree  ia  made  by  me.  Chald.  '  And 
from  me,  a  decree  is  laid  down,'  or  eu- 


guage,  -which  spea^  a  any  thin<» 
amiss  against  the  God  of  Shadracli^ 
Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  shall  bo 
e  cut  in  f  pieces,  and  their  housea 
shall  be  made  a  dunghill :  because 


■  c.  0. 26,  27.        d  error. 


^made.        tc.  2.  5 


acted.  This  Chaldee  word  Z';'2 — means 
properly  taste,  flavour ;  then  judgment, 
the  power  of  discerning — apparently  as  of 
one  who  can  judge  of  wine,  &c.,  by  the 
taste ;  then  the  sentence,  the  decree 
which  is  consequent  on  .an  act  of  judging 
— always  retaining  the  idea  that  the  de- 
termination or  decree  is  based  on  a  con- 
ception of  the  true  merits  of  the  case. 
The  decree  in  this  case  was  not  desiguad 
to  be  regarded  as  arbitrary,  but  as  being 
founded  on  what  was  right  and  proper. 
He  had  seen  evidence  that  the  God  whom 
these  three  youths  worshipped  was  a  true 
God,  and  was  able  to  protect  those  who 
trusted  in  him,  and  regarding  him  as  a 
real  God,  he  made  this  proclamation  that 
respect  should  be  shown  to  him  through- 
out his  extended  realm.  ^  That  every 
people,  nation,  and  language.  This  de- 
cree is  in  accordance  with  the  usual  style 
of  an  Oriental  monarch.  It  was,  however, 
a  fact  that  the  empire  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar extended  over  nearly  all  of  the 
then  known  world.  ^  Which  speak  any 
thing  amiss.  Marg.,  error.  The  Chaldee 
word — rh'C' — means  error,  wrong,  and  it 
refers  here  to  any  thing  that  would  be 
fitted  to  lead  the  minds  of  men  astray  in 
regard  to  the  true  character  of  the  God 
whom  these  persons  worshipped.  The 
Vulgate  renders  it  blasphemy.  So  also  it 
is  rendered  in  the  Greek — l3\ao(pTjfiiai/. 
The  intention  was,  that  their  God  was  to 
be  acknowledged  as  .a  God  of  eminent 
power  and  rank.  It  does  not  appear  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  meant  that  he  should  bo 
regarded  as  the  only  true  God,  but  be 
was  willing,  in  accordance  with  the  pre- 
vailing notions  of  idolatry,  that  he  should 
take  his  place  among  the  gods,  and  a 
most  honoured  place.  ^  Shall  be  cut  in 
pieces.  Marg.,  made.  This  was  a  spe- 
cies of  punishment  that  was  common  in 
many  ancient  nations.  Gesenius.  IT  And 
their  houses  shall  be  made  a  dunghill. 
Comp.  2  Kings  x.  27.  The  idea  i:i,  that 
the  utmost  possible  dishonour  and  eon- 
tempt  should  be  placed  on  their  houses 


196 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  580. 


there  ig  no  other  God  that  can  de- 
liver after  this  sort. 

30  T[  Theu    the   king  a  promoted 


oy  devoting  them  to  the  most  vile  and 
offensive  uses.  IT  Becavse  there  is  no  other 
God  that  can  deliver  after  this  sort.  He 
does  not  say  that  there  was  no  other  god 
at  all,  for  his  mind  had  not  3'et  reached 
this  conclusion,  but  there  was  no  other 
one  who  had  equal  power  with  the  God 
of  the  Hebrews.  lie  had  seen  a  manifes- 
tation of  his  power  in  the  preservation  of 
the  three  Hebrews,  such  as  no  other  god 
had  ever  exhibited,  and  he  was  willing 
to  admit  that  in  this  respect  he  surpassed 
all  other  divinities. 

30.  Then  the  king  ^iromoted  Shadrach, 
&c.  Marg.,  inade  to  proy:)e)-.  The 
Chaldee  means  no  more  than  made  to 
prosper.  Whether  he  restored  them  to 
their  former  places,  or  to  higher  honours, 
does  not  appear.  There  would  be,  how- 
ever, nothing  inconsistent  with  his  usual 
course  in  supposing  that  he  raised  them 
to  more  exalted  stations.  IT  In  the  p>ro- 
vince  of  Babylon.     See  Notes  on   ch.  ii. 


Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego, 
in  the  province  of  Babylon. 


'  made  to  prosper. 


49.  The  Greek  and  the  Arabic  add  here, 
"  And  he  counted  them  worthy  to  preside 
over  all  the  Jews  that  were  in  his  king- 
dom." But  nothing  of  this  is  found  in 
the  Chaldee,  and  it  is  not  known  by 
whom  this  addition  was  made. 

In  the  Vulgate  and  the  Greek  versions, 
and  in  some  of  the  critical  editions  of  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures  (Walton,  Hahn,  &c.), 
the  three  first  verses  of  the  following 
chapter  are  subjoined  to  this.  It  is  well 
known  that  the  divisions  of  the  chapters 
are  of  no  authority,  but  it  is  clear  that 
these  verses  belong  more  appropriately 
to  the  following  chapter  than  to  this,  as 
the  reason  there  assigned  by  the  mon- 
arch for  the  proclamation  is  what  occurred 
to  himself,  (ver.  2,)  rather  than  what  he 
had  witnessed  in  others.  The  division, 
therefore,  which  is  made  in  our  com- 
'  mon  version  of  the  Bible,  and  in  the 
,  Syriac  and  the  Arabic,  is  the  correct 
I  one. 


PRACTICAL    REMARKS. 

I.  The  instance  recorded  in  this  chapter  (vs.  1 — 7,)  is  not  improbably  the  first  case  which 
ever  occurred  in  the  world,  of  an  attempt  to  produce  co^iformity  iu  idolatrous  worship  by  penal 
Statute.  It  has,  however,  been  abundantly  imitated  since,  alike  in  the  heathen  and  in  the 
nominal!}'  Christian  world.  There  are  no  portions  of  history  more  interesting  tlian  those  which 
describe  the  progress  of  religious  liberty;  the  various  steps  which  have  been  taken  to  reach  the 
result  which  has  now  been  arrived  at,  and  to  settle  the  principles  which  are  now  regarded  as 
the  true  ones.  Between  the  views  which  were  formerly  entertained,  and  which  are  still  enter- 
tained in  many  countries,  and  those  which  constitute  the  Protestant  notions  on  the  subject, 
there  is  a  greater  diiferenco  than  there  is  in  regard  to  civil  rights' between  the  views  which  pre- 
vail under  an  Oriental  despotism,  and  the  most  enlarged  and  enlightened  notions  of  civil  free- 
dom. The  views  which  have  prevailed  on  the  subject  are  the  following : — 1.  The  (7e«e;-a?  doc- 
trine among  the  heathen  has  been,  that  there  were  many  gods  in  heaven  and  earth,  and  that 
all  were  entitled  to  reverence.  One  nation  was  supposed  to  have  as  good  a  right  to  worship  its 
own  gods  as  another,  and  it  was  regarded  as  at  least  an  act  of  courtesy  to  show  respect  to  the 
gods  that  any  nation  adored,  iu  the  same  way  as  respect  would  be  shown  to  tlie  sovereigns  who 
presided  over  them.  Hence  the  gods  of  all  nations  could  be  consistently  introduced  into  the 
Pantheon  at  Itome ;  hence  there  were  few  attempts  to  proselyte  among  the  heathen  ;  and  hence 
it  was  not  common  to  jjersecute  those  who  worshipped  other  gods.  I'ersecution  of  idolaters  by 
those  who  were  idolaters,  was,  therefore,  rarely  known  among  the  heathen,  and  toleration  was 
not  contrary  to  the  view.f  which  prevailed,  provided  the  gods  of  the  country  were  recognized. 
In  ancient  Chaldee,  Assyria,  Greece,  and  Rome  in  the  earliest  ages,  persecution  was  rare,  and  the 
toleration  of  other  forms  of  religion  was  usual.  2.  The  views  which  have  prevailed  lead- 
ing to  persecution,  and  which  are  a  viol.ation,  as  we  suppose,  of  all  just  notions  of  liberty 
on  the  subject  of  religion,  are  the  following:  (o)  Those  among  the  heathen  which,  as  in 
the  ease  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  require  all  to  worship  a  particular  god  that  should  be  set  up. 
In  such  a  case,  it  is  clear  that  while  all  who  were  idolaters,  and  who  supposed  that  all  tlie 
gods  worshipped  bj'  others  should  be  respected,  could  render  homage;  it  is  also  clear  that 
Ihosc  who  regarded  all  idols  as  f;dse  gods,  and  believed  that  none  of  them  ought  to  be  wor- 
shipped, could  not  comply  wilh  the  command.  Such  was  the  case  with  the  Jews  who  were 
in  Babylon  (vs.  8 — 18,)  for  supposing  that  there  was  but  one  God,  it  was  plain  that  they  could 
aot  render  homage  to  any  other.  While,  therefore,  every  idolater  could  render  homage  to  any 
iflo!,  the  Hebrew  could  render  homage  to  none.     (6)  The  views  among  the  heathen  prohibiting 


B.C.  580.]  CHAPTER    III.  19i 

the  cxcrcife  of  a  certain  kind  of  religion.  Acoorilinp;  to  the  prcn.ihng  views,  no  mode  of  reli 
cioii  could  be  tolerated  winch  would  maintain  that  all  the  gods  tliat  were  worshipped  were 
false.  Iteliuion  was  supposed  to  be  identified  with  the  best  interests  of  tlie  stale,  and  was 
recoiinized  by  tlie  laws,  and  protected  by  the  laws.  To  deny  the  claim,  therefore,  of  any  and 
of  all  the  gods  that  were  worshipped;  to  maintain  that  all  wore  false  alike;  to  call  on  men  to 
forsake  their  idols,  and  to  embrace  a  new  religion — .ill  this  was  regarded  as  an  attack  on  the 
state.  This  w.as  the  attitude  which  Christianity  assumed  towards  the  religions  of  the  Homan 
empire,  and  it  was  this  which  led  to  the  fiery  persecutions  which  prevailed  there.  'While  Homo 
could  consistently  tolerate  any  form  of  idolatry  that  would  recognize  the  religion  estalilished 
by  the  state,  it  could  not  tolerate  a  system  which  maintained  that  all  idolatry  was  wrong.  It 
would  allow  another  god  to  be  placed  in  the  Pantheon,  but  it  could  not  recognize  a. system  which 
would  remove  every  god  from  that  temple.  Christianity,  then,  made  war  on  the  system  of 
idolatry  that  prevailed  in  the  Roman  empire  in  two  respects :  in  proclaiming  a  purer  religion, 
denouncing  all  the  corruptions  which  idolatry  had  engendered,  and  which  it  countenanced ; 
and  in  denying  altogetlier  that  the  gods  which  wore  worshipped  were  true  gods — thus  arraying: 
itself  against  the  laws,  the  priesthood,  the  venerable  institutions,  and  all  the  passions  and  pi-e- 
judiccs  of  the  people.  These  views  may  be  thus  summed  up:  (i()  all  the  gods  worshipped  by 
others  were  to  be  recognized;  (/j)  new  ones  might  be  introduced  by  authority  of  the  state; 
(c)  the  gods  which  the  state  approved  and  acknowledged  wore  to  be  honoured  by  all ;  (d)  if 
any  persons  denied  their  existence,  and  their  claims  to  homage,  they  were  to  be  treated  as 
cnemiL-s  of  the  state.  It  was  on  this  last  principle  that  persecutions  ever  arose  under  the 
heathen  forms  of  religion.  Infidels,  indeed,  have  been  accustomed  to  charge  Christianity 
with  all  the  persecutions  on  account  of  religion,  and  to  speak  in  high  terms  of  "  the  mild 
tolerance  of  the  ancient  heathens;"'  of  "the  universal  toleration  of  polytheism;"  of  '-the  Ko- 
man  princes  beholding  without  concern  a  thousand  forms  of  religion  subsisting  in  peace  un- 
der their  gentle  sway."  Gibhim.  Hut  it  should  be  remembered  that  pagan  nations  required  of 
every  citizen  conformity  to  their  national  idolatries.  ^Vlien  this  was  refused,  persecution  arose  as 
a  matter  of  course.  Stilpo  was  banished  from  Athens  for  affirming  that  the  statue  of  Minerva 
in  the  citadel  was  no  divinity,  but  only  the  work  of  the  chisel  of  Phidias.  Protagoras  received 
a  similar  punishment  for  this  .sentence:  "AVhether  there  be  gods  or  not,  I  have  nothing  to 
offer."  Prodicus,  and  his  pupil  Socrates,  suffered  death  for  opinions  at  variance  with  the  estab- 
lished idolatry  of  .\thens.  Alcibiades  and  jEschylus  narrowly  escaped  a  like  end  for  a  similar 
cause.  Cicero  lays  it  down  as  a  principle  of  legislation  entirely  conformable  to  the  laws  of  the 
Roman  state,  that  "  no  man  shall  have  separate  gods  for  himself;  and  no  man  shall  worship  by 
himself  new  or  foreign  gods,  unless  they  have  been  publicly  acknow iedged  by  the  laws  of  the 
state."  De  Legibus,  II.  8.  Julius  Paulus,  the  lloman  civilian,  gives  the  following  as  a  leading 
feature  of  the  Roman  l.aw:  '•  Those  who  introduced  new  religions,  or  such  as  were  unknown  in 
their  tendency  and  nature,  by  which  the  minds  of  men  might  be  agitated,  were  degraded,  if  they 
belonged  to  the  higher  ranks,  and  if  they  were  in  a  lower  state,  were  punished  with  death." 
See  Jlcllvaine's  Lectures  on  the  Evidences  of  Christianity,  pp.  427 — 129.  (e)  The  attempts 
made  to  produce  couformity  in  countries  where  the  Christian  system  has  prevailed.  In  such 
countries,  as  among  the  heathen,  it  has  been  supposed  that  religion  is  an  important  auxiliary 
to  the  purposes  of  the  state,  and  that  it  is  proper  that  the  st.ate  should  not  o\i\y  ])rotect  it,  but 
regulate  it.  It  has  claimed  the  right,  therefore,  to  prescribe  the  form  of  religion  which  shall 
prevail ;  to  require  conformity  to  that,  and  to  punish  all  who  did  not  conform  to  the  established 
mode  of  worship.  This  attempt  to  produce  conformity  has  led  to  most  of  the  persecutions  of 
modern  times,  o.  The  principles  which  have  been  settled  by  the  discussions  and  agitations  of  past 
times,  and  which  .are  recognized  in  ail  countries  where  there  are  any  just  views  of  religious  liberty, 
and  which  are  destined  yet  to  be  universally  recognized,  are  the  following:  (a)  There  is  to  be, 
on  the  subject  of  religion,  perfect  liberty  to  \vor.ship  God  in  the  manner  that  shall  be  most  in 
.accordance  with  the  views  of  the  individual  himself,  provided  in  doing  it  he  does  not  interfere 
with  the  rights,  or  disturb  the  worship  of  others.  It  is  not  merely  that  men  are  to  be  tolerated 
in  the  exercise  of  their  religion— for  the  word  tolerate  would  seem  to  imply  that  the  state  had 
some  right  of  control  in  the  matter— but  the  true  word  to  express  the  idea  is  Uherty.  (b)  The 
state  is  to  protect  all  in  the  enjoyment  of  these  equal  rights.  Its  autliority  does  not  go  beyond 
this;  its  duty  demands  this.  These  two  principles  compose  all  that  are  required  on  the  subject 
of  religious  liberty.  They  have  been  in  our  world,  however,  principles  of  slow  growth.  They 
were  unknown  in  Greece — for  f-ccratcs  died  because  they  were  not  nndcrstccd;  Ibty  were 
unknown  in  Rome — for  the  state  claimed  the  power  to  determine  what  gods  should  be 
admitted  into  the  Pantheon  ;  they  were  unknown  even  in  Judea — for  a  national  or  state  reli- 
gion w.as  established  there ;  they  were  unknown  in  Babylon — for  the  monarch  there  claimed 
ihe  right  of  enforcing  conformity  to  the  national  religion;  they  were  unknown  in  Europe  in 
the  middle  ages — for'all  the  horrors  of  the  inquisition  grew  out  of  the  fact  that  they  were  not 
understood;  *hey  are  unknown  in  Turkey,  and  China,  and  Persi.a- for  the  state  regards  reli- 
cion  as  under  its  control.  The  doctrine  of  entire  freedom  in  religion ;  of  perfect  liberty  to  w  or.sh;p 
CJoiI  according  to  our  own  views  of  right,  is  the  last  point  lukich  society  is  to  reach  in  this  direction. 
[t  is  impossible  to  conceive  that  there  is  to  be  .anything  beyond  this  which  mankind  are  to 
desire  in  the  progress  towards  the  perfection  of  the  .social  organization;  and  when  this  shall  be 
everywhere  reached,  the  affairs  of  the  world  will  be  placed  on  a  permanent  footing. 

II.  In  the  spirit  evinced  by  the  three  yoUng  men,  and  the  answer  which  they  gave,  when 
accused  of  not  worshipping  the  image,  and  when  threatened  with  a  horrid  death,  we  have  a 
tjcautiful  illustration  of  ti-«  nature  and  value  of  tlie  relit/ion  of  principle,  vs.  12—18.    To  enable  xta 
17* 


198  DANIEL.  [B.  C  580. 

-o  sec  the  force  of  this  example,  and  to  appreciate  its  value,  we  are  to  remember  that  thesa 
ivere  yet  comparativelj-  j-oung  men  ;  that  they  were  captives  in  a  distant  land  ;  that  they  had 
no  powerful  friends  at  court;  that  they  had  had,  compared  with  what  we  now  have,  few  advan- 
tages of  instruction;  that  they  were  threatened  with  a  most  horrid  death;  and  that  they  had 
nothing  of  a  worldly  nature  to  hope  for  hy  refusing  compliance  with  the  king's  commands. 
This  instance  is  of  value  to  us,  liecause  it  is  not  only  importaut  to  hare  rdigifm,  but  lo  hare  the 
best  Idnd  of  religion  ;  and  it  is  doubtless  in  order  that  we  7n«vhave  this,  that  such  examples 
are  set  before  us  in  the  scriptures.  In  regard  to  this  kind  of  religion,  there  are  three  inquiries 
which  would  present  themselves :  on  what  is  it  founded  ?  what  will  it  lead  us  to  do?  and  what 
is  its  value?  (1)  It  is  founded  mainly  on  two  things:  an  intelligent  view  of  duty,  and  fixed 
principle,  (a)  An  intelligent  view  of  duty  ;  an  .icquaintance  with  what  is  right,  and  what  i.s 
wrong.  These  young  men  had  made  up  their  minds  intelligently,  that  it  was  right  to  worship 
God,  and  that  it  was  wrong  to  render  homage  to  an  idol.  This  was  not  obstinacy.  Obstinacy 
exists  where  a  man  has  made  up  his  mind,  and  resolves  to  act,  without  any  good  reason,  or 
without  an  intelligent  view  of  what  is  right  or  wrong,  and  where  he  adheres  to  his  purpose  not 
because  it  is  right,  but  from  the  influence  of  mere  will.  The  religion  of  principle  is  always 
found  where  there  is  an  intelligent  view  of  what  is  right,  and  a  man  can  give  a  reason  for  what 
he  does,  (b)  This  religion  is  founded  on  a  determination  to  do  what  is  right,  and  iict  to  do 
what  is  wrong.  The  question  is  not  what  is  expedient,  or  popular,  or  honourable,  or  lucrative, 
or  pleasant,  but  what  is  right.  (-)  AVhat  will  such  a  religion  lead  us  to  do?  This  question 
may  be  answered  by  a  reference  to  thecase  before  us,  and  it  will  be  found  that  it  will  lead  us  to  do 
these  things:  (a)  To  do  our  duty  without  being  solicitous  or  anxious  about  the  results,  ver. IG. 
(6)  To  put  confidence  in  God,  feeling  that  if  he  pleases,  he  can  protect  us  from  danger,  ver.  1". 
(c)  To  do  our  duty,  whaterer  may  he  Vie  consequences — whether  he  protects  us  or  not.  ver.  18. 
(^3)  What  is  the  raZ«e  of  this  kind  of  religion?  (a)  It  is  the  only  kind  in  which  there  is  any  fixed  and 
certain  standard.  If  a  man  regulates  his  opinions  and  conduct  from  expediency,  or  from  respect 
to  the  opinions  of  others,  or  from  feeling,  or  from  popular  impulses,  there  is  no  standard ;  there 
is  nothing  settled  or  definite.  Now  one  thing  is  popular,  now  another ;  to-day  the  feelings  may 
prompt  to  one  thing,  to-morrow  to  another ;  at  one  time  expediency  will  suggest  one  course, 
at  another  a  different  course,  (h)  It  is  the  only  kind  of  religion  on  which  reliance  can  be 
placed.  In  endeavouring  to  spread  the  gospel;  to  meet  the  evils  which  are  in  the  world:  to 
promote  the  cause  of  temperance,  chastity,  liberty,  truth,  and  peace,  the  only  thing  on  which 
permanent  reliance  can  be  placed  is  the  religion  of  principle.  And  (c)  it  is  the  only  religion 
which  is  certainly  genuine.  A  man  may  see  much  poetic  beauty  in  religion  ;  he  may  have  much 
of  the  religion  of  sentiment;  he  may  admire  God  in  the  grandeur  of  liis  works;  he  may  have 
warm  feelings  easily  enkindled  on  the  subject  of  religion,  and  may  even  weep  at  the  foot  of  the 
cross  in  view  of  the  wrongs  and  woes  that  the  Saviour  endured  ;  he  may  be  impressed  with  the 
forms,  and  pomp,  and  splendour  of  gorgeous  worship,  and  still  have  no  genuine  repentance  for 
his  sins,  no  saving  faith  in  the  IJedeemer,  no  real  love  to  God. 

III.  We  have  in  this  chapter  (vs.  19^23,)  an  affecting  case  of  an  attempt  to  punish  men  for 
holding  certain  opinions,  and  for  acting  in  conformity  with  them.  When  we  read  of  an  instance 
of  persecution  like  this,  it  occurs  to  us  to  .ask  the  following  questions: — What  is  persecution? 
why  has  it  been  permitted  by  God  ?  and  what  effects  have  followed  from  it  ?  (1)  What  is  persecu- 
tion? It  is  pain  inflicted,  or  some  loss,  or  disadvantage  in  person,  family,  or  office,  on  account 
of  holding  certain  opinions.  It  has  had  two  objects ;  one  to  punish  men  for  holding  certain  opi- 
nions, as  if  the  persecutor  had  a  right  to  regard  this  .as  an  offence  against  the  state;  and  tho 
other  a  professed  view  to  reclaim  those  who  are  made  to  suffer,  and  to  save  their  souls.  In 
regard  to  the  pain  or  siiffn-inr/  involved  in  persecution,  it  is  not  material  what  lind  of  pain  is 
inflicted  in  order  to  constitute  persecution.  ^7!!/ bodily  suffering;  any  deprivation  of  comfort ; 
any  exclusion  from  office ;  any  holding  up  of  one  to  public  reproach  ;  or  any  form  of  ridicule, 
con.stitutes  the  essence  of  persecution.  It  may  be  added,  that  not  a  few  of  the  inventions  most 
distinguished  for  inflicting  pain,  and  known  as  refinements  of  cruelty,  have  been  originated  in 
times  of  persecution,  and  would  propably  have  been  unknown  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  pur- 
pose of  restraining  men  from  the  free  exercise  of  religious  opinions.  TheInq\iisition  has  been 
most  eminent  in  this;  and  within  tho  walls  of  that  dreaded  institution,  it  is  probable  that 
human  ingenuity  has  been  exhausted  in  devising  the  most  refined  modes  of  inflicting  torture 
on  the  human  frame.  (2)  Why  has  this  been  permitted?  Among  the  reasons  why  it  has  been 
permitted,  may  be  the  following :  (a)  To  show  the  power  and  reality  of  religion.  It  seemed 
de.=irable  to  subject  it  to  all  kinds  of  trial,  in  order  to  show  that  its  existence  could  not  be  ac- 
counted for  except  on  the  supposition  that  it  is  from  God.  If  men  had  never  been  called  on  to 
suffer  on  account  of  religion,  it  would  have  been  easy  for  the  enemy  of  religion  to  allege  that 
there  was  little  evidence  that  it  was  genuine,  or  was  of  value,  for  it  had  never  been  tried. 
Comp.  Job  i.  9 — 11.  As  it  is,  it  has  been  subjected  to  ereryform  of  trial  which  wicked  men  could 
devise,  and  has  shown  it.'^elf  to  bo  adapted  to  meet  them  all.  The  work  of  the  martyrs  has  been 
well  done ;  and  religion  in  tho  times  of  martyrdom  has  shown  itself  to  be  all  that  it  is  desirabla 
it  should  be.  (6)  In  order  to  promote  its  spread  in  the  world.  'The  blood  of  the  martyrs 
has  been  the  seed  of  the  church,'  and  it  is  probable  that  religion  in  past  times  has  owed  much 
of  its  purity,  and  of  its  diffusion,  to  the  fact  that  it  has  been  persecuted.  (c)To  fit  the  sufferers 
frran  exalted  place  in  heaven.  They  who  have  suffered  persecution  needed  trials  as  well  as 
others,  for  cdl  Christians  need  them — and  theirs  cftnie  in  this  form.  Some  of  the  most  lovely 
traits  of  Christian  character  have  been  brought  out  in  connection  with  persecution,  and  some 
01  the  mobt  triumphant  exhibitions  of  preparation  for  heaven  have  been  made  at  the  stake. 


i3.  C.  570.]  CHAP  T  E  R    IV.  199 

^3)  What  have  been  the  effects  of  persecution  ?  (a)  It  has  been  tlic  sdtlnd  point  that  tlie  Chris- 
tian religion  cannot  be  destroyed  by  persecution.  Tlierc  is  no  power  to  be  brought  aj^jiinst  it 
lucre  mighty  tlniu,  for  example,  was  that  of  the  Kouian  empire ;  and  it  is  impossible  to  conceive 
that  there  should  be  greater  refinements  of  cruelty  than  liave  been  employed.  (/;)Tl\e  clTect 
has  been  to  diffuse  the  reli;j:iou  which  has  been  persecuted.  Tlie  manner  in  which  tin;  sufferings 
intiicted  have  been  endured,  has  shown  that  there  is  reality  and  power  in  it.  It  is  also  a  law  of 
human  nature  to  sympathize  with  the  wronged  and  the  oppressed,  and  we  insensibly  learn  to 
transfer  the  sympathy  which  wo  have  fur  these  persons  to  their  opinions.  When  we  see  ono 
who  is  tcronged.  wo  soon  find  our  hearts  boating  in  unison  with  his,  and  soou  find  ourselves 
taking  sides  with  him  in  everything. 

IV.  W'c  have  in  this  chaptt'r  (vs.  24 — 27.)  an  instructive  illustration  of  the  x>^otection  which 
God  affords  his  people  in  times  of  trial.  These  men  were  thrown  into  the  furnace  on  account 
of  their  obedience  to  God,  and  their  refusal  to  do  that  which  they  knew  he  would  not  approve. 
The  result  .showed,  by  a  most  manifest  miracle,  that  they  were  right  in  the  course  which  they 
took,  and  their  conduct  was  the  occasion  of  furnishing  a  most  striking  proof  of  the  wisdom  of 
trusting  in  God  in  the  faithful  performance  of  duty,  irrespective  of  consequences.  Similar 
illustrations  were  furnished  in  the  case  of  Daniel  in  the  liou"s  den,  (ch.  vi.  IG — 22.)  and  of  I'eter, 
(Acts  xii.  1 — 10.)  But  a  question  of  much  interest  arises  here,  which  is,  What  kind  of  protection 
may  we.  look  for  now  ?  (1)  There  are  numerous  promises  made  to  the  righteous  of  every  age  and 
countrj'.  They  are  not  promises  indeed  of  miraculous  interference,  but  they  are  promises  of 
an  interposition  of  some  kind  in  their  behalf,  which  will  show  that  "  it  is  not  a  vain  thing 
to  serve  God."  Among  them,  are  those  recorded  in  the  following  places : — 2  Chron.  xvi.  9 ; 
Ps.  Iv.  3,  V.  12,  XV.  1—5,  xxxvii.3— 10,  17—20,  SJ^— iO,  Iviii.  11,  Ixxxiv.  11,  xcii.  12—15,  xcvii.  11, 
cxii.  1—5;  Prov.  iii.  3,  4,  31—35,  x.  2,  3,  6—9,  25—30,  xiii.  6—21,  22,  xiv.  30—34,  xvi.  8,  xx.  7, 
xxi.  21;  Isa.  xxxii.  17,  xxxiii.  15,  16;  Matt.  vi.  33;  1  Tim.  iv.  8,  9,  vi.  C;  1  Pet.  iii.  10— 13;  John 
xii.  26;  Ex.  xx.  5,  6;  Ps.  ix.  9, 10,  xxiii.  4,  xlvi.  1,  Iv.  22;  Isa.  liv.  7,  8;  Matt.  v.  4;  Job  v.  19. 
(2)  In  regard  to  the  kind  of  interposition  that  we  may  look  for  now,  or  the  nature  of  the  favoura 
implied  in  these  promises,  it  may  be  observed:  (a)  That  we  arc  not  to  look  for  any  miraculous 
interpositions  in  our  favour,  (b)  We  are  not  to  expect  that  there  will  be  on  earth  an  e^act 
adjicstment  of  the  divine  dealings  according  to  the  deserts  of  all  persons,  or  according  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  a  completed  moral  government,  when  there  will  be  a  perfect  system  of  rewards  and 
punishments,  (c)  We  are  not  to  expect  that  there  will  be  such  manifest  and  open  rewards  of 
obedience,  and  such  direct  and  constant  benefits  resulting  from  religion  in  this  world,  as  to  lead 
men  merely  from  these  to  serve  and  worship  God.  If  religion  were  always  attended  with  pros- 
perity ;  if  the  righteous  were  never  persecuted,  were  never  poor,  or  were  never  bereaved,  multi- 
tudes would  be  induced  to  become  religious,  as  many  followed  the  Saviour,  •  not  because  they 
saw  the  miracles,  but  because  they  did  eat  of  the  loaves  and  fishes,  and  were  filled,'  John  vi.  26. 
While,  therefore,  in  the  divine  administration  here  it  is  proper  that  there  should  bo  so  many 
and  so  marked  interpositions  in  favour  of  the  good  as  to  show  that  God  is  the  friend  of  his  peo- 
ple, it  is  not  proper  that  there  should  be  so  many  that  men  would  be  induced  to  engage  in  his 
service  for  the  love  of  the  reward  rather  than  for  the  sake  of  the  service  itself;  because  they  are 
to  be  happy,  rather  than  because  they  love  virtue.  It  may  be  expected,  therefore,  that  while 
the  general  course  of  the  divine  administration  will  be  in  favour  of  virtue,  there  may  be  much 
intermingletl  with  this  that  will  appear  to  be  of  a  contrary  kind  ;  much  that  will  be  fitted  to 
test  the  faith  of  the  people  of  God,  and  to  show  that  they  lore  his  service  for  its  own  sake. 

V.  We  have  in  vs.  28 — 30,  a  striking  instance  of  the  effect  which  an  adherence  to  principle 
will  produce  on  the  minds  of  worldly  and  wicked  men.  Such  men  have  no  love  for  religion, 
but  they  can  see  that  a  certain  course  accords  with  the  views  which  are  professedly  held,  and 
that  it  indicates  high  integrity.  They  can  see  that  firmness  and  consistency  are  worthy  of 
commendation  and  reward.  They  can  se«,  as  Nebuchadnezzar  did  in  this  case,  that  such  a 
course  will  secure  the  divine  favour,  and  they  will  be  di.sposed  to  honour  it  on  that  account. 
For  a  time,  a  tortuous  course  may  seem  to  prosper,  but  in  the  end,  solid  fame,  high  rewards, 
honourable  offices,  and  a  grateful  remembrance  after  death,  follow  in  the  path  of  strict  integrity 
and  unbending  virtue. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

g  1.  AUinENTICITY  OF  THE  CHAPTER. 


To  the  authenticity  of  this  chapter,  as  to  the  preceding,  objections  and  difficulties  have  been 
urged,  sufficient  in  the  view  of  the  objectors  to  destroy  its  credibility  as  a  historical  narrative. 
Those  objections,  which  may  be  seen  at  length  in  Bertholdt,  (pp.  70 — 72,  285 — 309,)  Bleek,  (Theol. 
Zeitscrift,  Drittcs  Ileft,  268,  scq..)  and  Eichhorn  (Einlei.  iv.  471,  seq.,)  relate  mainly  to  two 
points:  those  derived  from  the  w.mt  of  historical  proofs  to  confirm  the  narrative;  and  those 
derived  from  itt  alleged  intrinsic  improbability. 


200  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  570 

1.  The  former  of  these,  (Jcrived  from  the  want  of  historic  confirmation  of  the  truth  of  th« 
narrative,  are  summarily  the  following:  (1)  That  the  historical  hooks  of  th<i  Old  Testament 
pive  no  intimation  that  tliese  remarkable  things  happened  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  that  he  was 
deranged,  and  driven  from  his  throne,  and  made  to  dwell  under  the  open  heaven  with  the  beasts 
of  the  field— an  omission  which,  it  is  said,  we  cannot  suppose  would  have  occurred  if  these  things 
had  happened,  since  the  Hebrew  writers,  on  account  of  the  wrongs  which  Nebuchadnezzar  had 
done  to  their  nation,  would  have  certainly  seized  on  such  facts  as  a  demonstration  of  the  divine 
displeasure  against  him.  (2)  There  is  no  record  of  these  events  among  the  heathen  writers  of 
antiquity;  no  writer  among  the  Greeks,  or  other  nations,  ever  having  mentioned  them.  (3)  It 
is  equally  remarkable  that  ^losephus,  in  his  narrative  of  tlie  sickness  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  makes 
no  allusion  to  any  knowledge  of  this  among  other  nations,  and  shows  that  he  derived  his  infor- 
mation only  from  the  sacred  books  of  his  own  people.  (4)  It  is  acknowledged  by  Origcn  and 
Jerome  that  they  could  find  no  historical  grounds  for  the  truth  of  this  account.  (5)  If  these 
things  had  occurred,  as  here  related,  they  would  not  have  been  thus  concealed,  for  the  king 
himself  took  all  possible  measures  by  the  edict  referred  to  in  this  chapter,  to  make  them  known, 
and  to  make  a  permanent  record  of  them.  How  could  it  have  happened  that  all  knowledge 
would  have  been  lost  if  thoy  had  tlius  occurred?  (t)  If  the  edict  was  lost,  how  was  it  ever 
recovered  again?  When,  and  where,  and  by  whom,  was  it  found  ?  If  actually  issued,  it  was  de- 
signed to  make  the  case  known  throughout  the  empire.  'Why  did  it  fail  of  producing  that  effect 
so  as  not  to  have  been  forgotten?  If  it  was  lost,  how  was  the  event  known?  And  if  it  was 
lost,  how  could  it  have  been  recovered  and  recorded  by  the  author  of  this  book  ?  Comp.  13er- 
tholdt,  p.  29S. 

To  these  objections,  it  may  he  replied,  (1)  That  the  silence  of  the  historical  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  furnishes  no  well-founded  objection  to  what  is  said  in  this  chapter,  for  none  of  them 
pretend  to  bring  down  the  history  of  Nebuchadnezzar  to  tlie  close  of  his  life,  or  to  this  period  of 
his  life.  The  books  of  Kings  and  of  Chronicles  mention  his  invasion  of  the  laud  of  I'alcstine 
and  of  Egypt;  they  record  the  fact  of  his  carrying  away  the  children  of  Israel  to  Babylon,  but 
they  do  not  profess  to  make  any  record  of  what  occurred  to  Jtim  after  that,  nor  of  the  close  of 
his  life.  The  second  book  of  Chronicles  closes  with  an  account  of  tlie  removal  of  the  Jews  to 
Babylon,  and  the  carrying  away  of  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  temple,  and  the  burning  of  tho 
temple,  and  the  destruction  of  the  city,  but  does  not  relate  tho  history  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
any  farther.  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  Tho  silence  of  tho  book  cannot,  therefore,  be  alleged  as  an 
argument  against  anything  that  may  be  said  to  have  occurred  after  that.  As  the  history 
closes  there ;  as  the  design  was  to  give  a  record  of  Jewish  affairs  to  the  carrying  away  to  Baby- 
lon, and  not  a  history  of  Nebuchadnezzar  as  such,  there  is  no  ground  of  objection  furnished 
by  this  silence  in  regard  to  anything  that  might  be  said  to  have  occurred  to  Nebuchadnezzar 
subsequently  to  this  in  his  own  kingdom. 

In  regard  to  profane  writers,  also,  nothing  can  be  argued  as  to  the  improbability  of  the 
account  mentioned  here  from  their  silence  on  the  subject.  It  is  not  remarkable  that  in  tho 
few  fragments  which  are  found  in  their  writings  respecting  tlie  kings  and  empires  of  the  Kast, 
an  occurrence  of  this  kind  should  have  been  omitted.  The  general  worthlessness  or  want  of 
value  of  the  historical  writings  of  the  Greeks  in  respect  to  foreign  nations,  from  which  we 
derive  most  of  our  knowledge  of  those  nations,  is  now  generally  admitted,  and  ia  expressly 
maintained  by  Niebuhr,  and  by  Sclosser  (see  Ilengstenberg,  Die  Authentic  des  Daniel,  p.  10)), 
and  most  of  these  writers  make  no  allusion  at  all  to  Nebuchadnezzar.  Even  Herodotus,  who 
travelled  into  the  East,  and  who  collected  all  he  could  of  the  liistory  of  the  world,  makes  no 
mention  whatever  of  a  conqueror  so  illustrious  as  Nebuchadnezzar.  How  could  it  be  expected 
that  wlien  they  have  omitted  all  notice  of  his  conquests;  of  the  great  events  under  him, 
which  exerted  so  important  an  effect  on  the  world,  there  should  h.avc  been  a  record  of 
an  occurrence  like  that  referred  to  in  this  chapter — an  occurrence  that  seems  to  have  ex- 
erted no  influence  whatever  on  the  foreign  relations  of  the  empire?  It  is  remarkable  that 
Josephus,  who  searched  for  all  that  he  could  find  to  illustrate  the  literature  and  history  of  the 
Chaldees,  says  (Ant.  B.  x.  ch.  xi.  ^  1,)  that  he  could  find  only  the  following  "  histories  as  all 
that  he  had  met  with  concerning  this  king:  Berosus,  in  the  third  book  of  hisChaldaic  history; 
Philostratus,  in  the  history  of  Judea  and  of  the  Phoenicians,  who  only  mentions  him  in  respect 
to  his  siege  of  Tyre;  the  Indian  history  of  Megasthenes — 'li/6iKa — in  which  the  only  fact  which 
is  mentioned  of  him  is  that  he  plundered  Lybia  and  Iberia ;  and  the  Persian  history  of  DiccIeS; 
in  which  there  occurs  but  one  solitary  reference  to  Nebuchadnezzar."  To  these  he  adds,  in 
his  work  against  Appiau  (B.  i.  20.)  a  reference  to  the  "  Archives  of  the  Phoenicians,"  in  which 
t  is  said  that  "  he  conquered  Svria  and  Phoenicia."  Berosus  is  the  only  one  who  pretends  to 
give  any  extended  account  of  htm.  See  Ant.  B.  x.  ch.xi.  §  1.  All  those  authorities  mentioned  by 
Josephus,  therefore,  except  Bcro.sus,  may  be  set  aside,  since  they  have  made  no  allusion  to  many 
undeniable  facts  in  the  life  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and,  therefore,  the  events  referred  to  in  this 
chapter  may  have  occurred,  though  they  have  not  related  them.  'J  here  remain  two  authors 
who  have  noticed  Nebuchadnezzar  at  greater  length.  Abydenus  and  Berosus.  Abydenus  was 
a  Greek  who  lived  2CS  B.  C.  lie  wrote,  in  Greek,  an  historical  account  of  the  Chaldeans,  I'aby- 
lonians,  and  Assyrians,  only  a  few  fragments  of  whicli  have  been  preserved  by  Euscbius.  Cyrill, 
md  Syncellus.  Berosus  was  a  Chaldean,  and  was  a  priest  in  the  temple  of  Belus,  in  the  time 
;  f  Alexander,  and  having  learned  of  the  Macedonians  the  Greek  language,  he  went  to  Grccfc, 
»nd  opened  a  school  of  astronomy  and  astrology  in  the  island  of  Cos,  where  liis  productions 
acquired  for  him  great  fame  with  the  Athenians.  Abydenus  was  his  pupil .  Berosus  wrote  threo 
iooks  relative  to  the  history  of  the  Chaldeans,  of  which  only  some  fragments  are  preserved  in 


B.  C.  570.]  CHAPTER    IV.  3&1 

Josephus  and  Euseliias.  As  a  priest  of  Bel  us  he  possessed  every  adfantapre  ■which  could  be 
desired  for  obtaining:  a  knowledj^c  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  if  his  work  had  been  preserved  it 
would  doubtless  be  of  great  raluo.  Both  these  writers  professedly  derived  their  knowledge 
irom  the  traditions  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  both  sho^ild  be  regarded  as  good  auUiority. 

Bcrosus  is  adduced  by  .losepbus  to  confirm  the  truth  of  the  historical  records  in  the  Old  Tcs- 
t.iment.  lie  mentions,  according  to  .losephus.  the  deluge  in  the  time  of  Noah,  and  the  account 
of  the  resting  of  the  ark  on  one  of  the  mountains  of  Armenia.  He  gives  a  catalogue  of  the 
desceudants  of  Noah,  and  "  at  length  comes  down  to  Nabolasser,  who  was  king  of  Babylon  and 
of  the  Chaldeans."  lie  then  mentions  the  expedition  of  his  son,  Nebuchodonosor  (Nebuchad- 
nezzar), against  the  Egyptians;  the  capture  of  Jerusalem;  the  burning  of  the  temple;  and  the 
removal  of  the  .lews  to  Babylon.  lie  then  mentions  the  manner  in  which  Nebuchadnezzar 
succeeded  to  the  throne:  the  way  in  which  he  distributed  his  captives  in  various  parts  of  Baby- 
Ionia:  liis  adorning  of  the  temple  of  lielus:  his  rebuilding  the  old  city  of  Babylon,  and  tho 
buildins  of  another  city  on  the  other  side  of  the  river;  his  adding  a  new  pal.ace  to  that  which 
his  father  had  built;  and  the  fact  that  this  palace  was  finished  in  fifteen  d.iys.  After  these 
statements  respecting  his  conquests  and  the  magnificence  of  his  capital,  Berosus  gives  the 
following  narrative :  "  Nebuchodonosor,  after  he  had  begun  to  build  the  forcmcntioned  wall,  fell 
sick — Ef/irtfftji'  (i'$  dfpioaiai' — and  departed  this  lifo^/jErrjXXufaro  rdi'  0ioi/" — [a phrase  meaning 
to  die,  see  Passow  on  the  word  /jcruXXaffo-to]  "  when  he  had  reigned  forty-three  3-ears,  whereupon 
his  son,  Evil-JIerodach,  obtained  the  kingdom."  Jo.sephus  against  Apion,  B.  1.  g  20.  Now  this 
narrative  is  remarkable,  aud  goes  in  fact  to  confirm  the  statement  in  Daniel  in  two  respects: 
(a)  It  is  manifest  that  Berosus  here  refers  to  some  sickness  in  the  ease  of  Nebuchadnezzar  that 
w.as  unusual,  and  that  probably  preceded,  for  a  considerable  time,  his  death.  This  appears 
from  the  fact,  that  in  the  case  of  the  other  monarchs  whom  lie  mentions  in  immediate  connec- 
tion with  this  narrative,  no  sickness  is  alluded  to  as  preceding  their  death.  This  is  the  case 
with  respect  to  Neriglissor  and  Nabounedus — successors  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  See  Jos.  against 
Ap.  i.  20.  There  is  no  improbability  in  .supposing  that  what  Berosus  here  calls  sickness,  is  the 
same  which  is  referred  to  in  the  chapter  hefore  us.  Berosus,  himself  a  Chaldean,  might  not  ho 
desirous  of  stating  all  the  facts  about  a  monarch  of  his  own  country  .so  distinguished,  and  might 
not  be  willing  to  state  all  that  he  knew  about  his  being  deprived  of  reason,  and  about  the 
manner  in  which  he  was  treated,  and  yet  what  occurred  to  him  was  so  remarkable,  and  was  so 
well  known,  that  there  seemed  to  be  a  necessity  of  alluding  to  it  in  some  way;  and  this  he  did 
in  the  most  general  manner  possible.  If  this  were  his  object,  also,  he  would  not  be  likely  to 
mention  the  fact  that  lie  was  restored  again  to  the  throne.  lie  would  endeavour  to  make  it 
appear  as  an  ordinary  event — a  sickness  which  preceded  death — as  it  mijy  have  been  the  fact 
that  he  never  was  wholly  restored  so  t.\r  as  to  be  in  perfect  health,  lb)  This  statement  of  Be- 
rosus accords,  in  respect  to  time,  remarkably  with  that  in  Daniel.  B  jth  accounts  agree  that 
the  sickness  occurred  after  he  had  built  Babylon,  and  towards  the  close  of  his  reign. 

The  other  author  which  is  referred  to,  is  Abydenus.  The  record  which  he  makes  is  preserved 
by  Eusebius,  proep.  Evang.  i.\.  41,  and  C/ironicon  Armenola'.iinim,  I.  p.  59,  and  is  in  the  fol- 
lowing words:  nerd  Tavra  dt,  Xcyerai  irpoi  'S.aXSaiaiv,  wf  d»'a/j'uj  eni  ra  (iaaiXfiia,  KaraaXC' 
^c'.t)  Stci)  ortQ)  ih,  (pSeylaiiCfo;  6i  ilirzn'  ovro;  iyoi  KajyovKoipoaopos,  cj  Ba'JvXjJi'ioi,  rrji/ 
fiiWovaav  VjjTv  TrpoayycXXu  avjxipop!]!/,  riji'  ore  B'7Xoj  f/^dj  Trpoyovog,  ijTt  PaaiXeta  B^Xrif 
dTrorpeipai  IMofpaj  ittiaai  daicfovaii''  ii|£i  Tlcparn  i)/n'ui'0{,  TOiat  v/itrcpoiat  iaipoai  XP^^^fU'Of 
avujjLaXoiaw  CTra^ei  61  ^oi'XooCt'fji',  oi  6>i  avvalrioi  carai  iM>}^»;j,  rd  ' Aaovpiov  avxifot'  wj  siis 
^iv  ^•pdo•^£^  Jj  ioiifai  tov;  7roXi))raj,  Xupi/JJii'  tu'O,  >";  SitXaaaan  ctiit^a^ittirji'^  diirrwaat 
vpoppi^ov  (j  jiiv  dWai  o^oDj  arpaiiytPTa  (jjipeaSai  i?iu  riji  ipiipioVj  'iia  oiirc  darca,  oijrc  Ttaro; 
di'Sp-JnojVj  Si)pt;  6i  vopou  i\ovji  Ka\  iipviSc;  nXiICoi'Taij  tv  tc  Jjirpriai  Kal  X''Pii^P>l'>i  povt'ov 
aXoficvov  ryik  rt.  Ttp'iv  ei;  voov  jiaXia'iai  raura,  tiXeoj  dfiilvovo;  Kvpnaai.  'O  jiiv  StiTriaa; 
vapaxpnpia  i^/idno-ro.  This  pas.sage  is  so  rem.arkahic,  that  I  annex  a  translation  of  it,  as  I  find 
it  in  Prof.  Stuart's  work  on  Daniel,  p.  122:  "After  these  things."  [his  conquests  which  the 
writer  had  before  referred  to.]  "  as  it  is  said  hy  tho  Chaldeans,  having  ascended  his  palace,  he 
was  seized  by  some  god.  and  speaking  aloud,  he  said :  '  I,  Nebuchadnezzar,  0  Babylonians, 
foretel  your  future  calamity,  which  neither  Belu.s,  my  ancestor,  nor  queen  Belis,  can  persuade 
tho  destinies  to  avert.  X  Pcrsiun  mitle  viWl  come,  employing  your  own  divinities  as  his  aux- 
iliaries; and  he  will  impose  servitude  [upon  you].  His  coadjutor  will  be  the  Medf.  who  is  the 
boast  of  the  Assyrians.  Would  that,  before  he  places  my  citizens  in  such  a  condition,  soma 
Cbarybdis  or  gulf  might  swallow  him  up  with  utter  destruction  !  Or  that,  turned  in  a  different 
direction,  he  might  ro.am  in  the  desert  (where  are  neither  cities,  nor  footsteps  of  man,  liut  wild 
beasts  find  pasturage,  and  the  birds  wander.)  being  there  hemmed  in  by  rocks  and  ravines! 
May  it  be  my  lot  to  attain  to  a  better  end.  before  such  things  come  into  his  mind!'  Having 
uttered  this  prediction,  he  forthwith  disappeared."  This  pass.age  so  .strongly  re.=erables  the 
account  in  Daniel  iv.,  that  even  Bertholdt  (p.  296)  admits  that  it  is  identical — identisch — with 
it.  though  he  still  maintains,  that  although  it  refers  to  mental  derangement,  it  does  nothing 
to  confirm  tho  account  of  his  being  made  to  live  with  wild  beasts,  eating  grass,  and  being 
restored  again  to  his  throne.  The  points  of  ar/i-eemoit  in  the  account  of  Abydenus  and  that 
of  Daniel  arc  the  following:  (1)  The  account  of  Abydenus,  as  Bertholdt  admits,  refers  to 
mental  derangement    Such  a  mental  derangement,  and  the  power  of  prophecy,  were  in  the 


202  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  570 

»is'^  of  the  ancients  closely  connected,  or  were  identical,  and  were  believed  to  te  produced  ty 
the  OTerpowerius  influence  of  the  gods  on  the  soul.  The  rational  powers  of  the  soul  were  sup 
posed  to  be  suspended,  and  the  god  took  entire  possession  of  the  l.ody,  and  through  that  com 
municated  the  knowledge  of  future  e-rents.  Conip.  Dale,  do  oraculis  ethnirorum,  p.  172, 
I'lusebius,  Chron.  Arm.  lat.  p.  61.  In  itselfconsidered,  moreover,  nothing  would  be  more  natural 
than  that  Mebuchadnezzar,  in  the  malady  that  came  upon  him,  or  when  it  was  coming  upon 
him,  would  express  himself  in  the  manner  affirmed  by  Abydenus  respecting  the  coming  of  tho 
I'ersian,  and  the  change  that  would  occur  to  his  own  kingdom.  If  the  account  in  Daniel  is 
true  respecting  the  predictions  which  he  is  said  to  have  uttered  concerning  coming  events  (ch. 
ii),  nothing  would  be  more  natural  than  that  the  mind  of  the  monarch  would  be  filled  with 
the  anticipation  of  these  events,  and  that  he  would  give  utterance  to  his  anticipations  in  a 
time  of  mental  excitement.  (2)  There  is  a  remarkable  agreement  between  Abydenus  and 
Daniel  in  regard  to  the  time  and  the  place  in  which  what  is  said  of  tho  king  occurred.  Accord- 
ing to  Abydenus,  the  prophetic  ecstacy  into  which  he  fell  was  at  the  close  of  all  his  military 
expeditions,  and  occurred  in  the  same  place,  and  in  the  same  circumstances,  which  are  men- 
tioned in  the  book  of  Daniel — upon  his  palace — apparently  as  ho  walked  upon  the  roof,  or  upon 
some  place  where  he  had  a  clear  view  of  the  surrounding  city  which  he  had  built — dvajiai  trrt 
ni  fJaat\i)l'a.  (3)  The  accounts  in  Abydenus  and  in  Daniel  harmonize  so  far  as  they  relate  to 
the  God  by  whom  what  occurred  was  produced.  In  Daniel  it  is  attributed  to  the  true  God,  and 
not  to  any  of  the  objects  of  Chaldean  worship.  It  is  remarkable  that  in  Abydenus  it  is  not 
ascribed  to  an  idol,  or  to  any  god  worshipped  by  the  Chaldees,  but  to  God  simply,  as  to  a 
God  that  was  now  known — Karaaxciciri  i:t(c  otco)  tii").  It  would  seem  from  this  that  even  tho 
Chaldee  tradition  did  not  attribute  what  was  said  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  or  what  occurred  to 
him,  to  any  of  the  gods  v.-orshippcd  in  Babylon,  but  to  a  foreign  god,  or  to  one  whom  they  were 
not  accu.stomed  to  worship.  (4)  In  the  language  which  Nebuchadnezzar  is  reported  by  Abyde- 
nus to  have  used  respecting  tho  return  of  the  Per.sian  king  after  his  conquest,  there  is  a 
remarkable  resemblance  tn  what  is  said  in  Daniel,  showing  that,  though  the  language  is  applied 
to  dilTorent  things  in  Daniel  and  in  Abydenus,  it  liad  a  common  origin.  Thus,  in  the  prophecy 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  as  reported  by  Abydenus,  it  is  said, 'may  he.  returning  through  other 
ways,  be  borne  through  the  desert  where  there  are  no  cities,  where  there  is  no  path  for  men, 
where  wild  beasts  graze,  and  the  fowls  live,  wandering  about  in  the  midst  of  rocks  and  caves.' 
These  considerations  show  that  the  Chaldean  traditions  strongly  corroborate  the  account  here; 
or,  that  there  are  things  in  these  traditions  which  cannot  be  accounted  for  except  on  the  sup- 
position of  the  truth  of  some  such  occurrence  as  that  which  is  here  stated  in  Daniel.  The 
sum  of  the  evidence  from  history  is,  (a)  that  very  few  things  are  known  of  this  monarch 
from  profane  history ;  (b)  that  there  is  nothing  in  what  is  known  of  him  which  makes 
v.hat  is  here  stated  improbable;  (c)  that  there  are  things  related  of  him  which  har- 
monize with  what  is  here  affirmed ;  and  (rf)  that  there  are  traditions  which  can  be  best  ex- 
plained by  some  such  supposition  as  that  the  record  in  this  chapter  is  true. 

As  to  the  objection  that  if  the  edict  was  promulgated  it  would  not  be  likely  to  be  lost,  or  the 
memory  of  it  fade  away,  it  is  sufficient  to  observe  that  almost  all  of  the  edict.s,  the  laws,  and  the 
statutes  of  the  .Assyrian  and  Chaldean  princes  have  perished  with  all  the  other  records  of  their 
history,  and  almost  all  the  facts  pertaining  to  the  personal  or  the  public  history  of  these  mon- 
archs  are  now  unknown.  It  cannot  be  believed  that  the  few  fragments  which  we  now  have 
of  their  writings  are  all  that  were  ever  composed,  and  in  the  thing  itself  there  is  no  more  im- 
probability that  OiisvCik-i  should  be  lost  than  any  other,  or  that  though  it  may  have  been  kept 
by  a  Hebrew  residing  among  them,  it  should  not  have  been  retained  by  the  Chaldeans  themselves. 
As  to  the  cjuestion  which  has  been  asked,  if  this  were  lost  how  it  could  have  been  recovered 
again,  it  is  sufficient  to  remark  that,  for  anything  that  appears,  it  never  was  lost  in  the  sense 
that  no  one  had  it  in  his  possession.  It  would  undoubtedly  come  into  the  hands  of  Daniel  if 
he  were,  according  to  the  account  in  his  book,  then  in  Babylon ;  and  it  is  not  probable  that  so 
remarkable  a  document  would  be  suffered  by  him  to  be  lost.  The  fact  that  it  was  preserved  by 
him,  is  all  that  is  needful  to  answer  the  questions  on  that  point.  It  may  have  been  swept 
away  with  other  matters  in  the  r\iin  that  came  upon  the  Chaldean  records  in  their  own 
country;  it  has  been  preserved  where  it  was  most  important  that  it  should  be  preserved — in  a 
hook  where  it  would  be  to  all  ages,  and  in  all  lands,  a  signal  proof  that  God  reigns  over  kings, 
and  that  he  has  power  to  humble  and  abase  the  proud. 

II.  There  is  a  second  tlass  of  objections  to  the  credibility  of  the  account  in  this  chapter  quite 
distinct  from  that  just  noticed.  They  are  based  on  what  is  alleged  to  be  the  intrinsic  improha- 
hililij  th.at  the  things  which  arc  said  to  have  occurred  to  Nebuchadnezzar  should  have  happened. 
It  cannot  be  alleged,  indeed,  that  it  is  incredible  that  a  monarch  should  become  a  maniac — for 
the  kings  of  the  earth  are  no  more  exempt  from  this  terrible  malady  than  their  .subjects;  but 
tho  objections  here  referred  to  relate  to  the  statements  respecting  the  manner  in  which  it  is 
Baid  that  this  monarch  was  treated,  ami  that  he  lived  during  this  long  period.  These 
objections  may  be  briefly  noticed.  (1)  It  has  been  objected,  that  it  is  wholly  improbable  that 
a  monarch  at  tho  head  of  such  an  empire  would,  if  he  became  incap.able  of  administering 
the  affairs  of  government,  be  so  utterly  neglected  as  the  representation  here  jvould  im- 
ply: — that  he  would  be  suffered  to  wander  from  his  palace  to  live  with  beasts;  to  fare  as 
they  fared,  and  to  become  in  bis  whole  appearance  so  like  a  beast.  It  is  indeed  admitted  by 
those  who  make  this  objection,  that  there  is  no  improbability  that  the  calamity  would  befall  a 
U\ig  *s  well  as  other  men ;  and  Miehaelis  has  remarked  that  it  is  even  more  probable  that  a  mon- 


B.C.  570.]  CHAPTER    IV.  203 

arch  would  be  thus  afflicted  than  others,  (Anin.  Z.  Dan.  p.  41,  Comp.  Bcrtl  >ldt,  p.  304.)  but  it 
is  allcfred  that  it  is  wholly  improbable  that  one  ?o  hiirh  in  office  and  in  power  would  be  treated 

with  the  utter  nejrlect  which  is  stated  here.     "Is  it  credible,"  says  Bertholdt,  (p.  SOO 303,) 

•■•  that  the  royal  family,  and  the  royal  counsellors,  should  have  shown  so  little  care  or  concern 
for  a  monarch  wlio  had  come  into  a  state  so  perfectly  helpless?  Would  no  one  have  .''ou"-ht 
him  out,  and  brought  him  back,  if  he  had  wandered  so  far  away  ?  Could  he  anywhere  in  The 
open  plains,  and  the  rej^ions  .about  Babylon,  destitute  of  forests,  have  concealed  himself  so  that 
no  one  could  have  found  him  ?  It  could  only  have  been  by  a  miracle,  that  one  could  have  wan- 
dered alMut  for  so  lonjr  a  time,  amidst  the  dangers  which  must  have  befallen  him,  williout 
having  been  destroyed  by  wild  beasts,  or  falling  into  some  form  of  irrscovarable  ruin.  'What  an 
unwise  policy  in  a  government  to  exhibit  to  newly  conquered  people  so  dishonourable  a 
spectacle !" 

To  this  objection  it  may  be  replied,  (n)  that  its  force,  as  it  was  formerly  urged,  may  be  some- 
what removed  by  a  correct  interpretation  of  the  chapter,  and  a  more  accurate  knowledge  of  the 
disease  which  came  upon  the  king,  and  of  the  manner  in  which  he  was  actually  treated.  Accord- 
ing to  some  views  formerly  entertained  respecting  the  nature  of  the  malady,  it  would  have  been 
impossible,  I  admit,  to  have  defended  tlie  narrative.  In  respect  to  these  views,  see  Notes  on 
ver.  25.  It  may  appear,  from  the  fair  interpretation  of  the  whole  narrative,  tliat  nothing  more 
occurred  than  was  natural  in  the  circumstances,  (h)  The  supposition  that  he  was  left  to  wan- 
der without  any  kind  of  oversight  or  guardianship,  is  entirely  gratuitous,  and  is  unauthorized 
by  the  account  which  Nebuchadnezzar  gives  of  what  occurred.  This  opinion  has  been  partly 
formed  from  a  false  interpretation  of  the  phrase  in  ver.  30 — '-and  my  counsellors  and  my  lords 
sovffht  unto  mc," — as  if  they  had  sought  him  wlien  he  was  wandering  with  a  view  to  find  out 
where  he  was;  whereas  tlie  true  meaning  of  that  passage  is,  that  after  his  restoration  they 
sought  unto  him,  or  applied  to  him  as  the  head  of  the  empire,  as  they  had  formerly  done, 
(c)  There  is  some  probability  from  the  passage  in  ver.  1.5 — '•  leave  the  stump  of  his  roots  in  the 
earth,  even  with  a  band  of  iron  and  brass' — that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  secured  in  the  manner  in 
which  maniacs  often  have  been,  and  that  in  his  rage  he  was  carefully  guarded  from  all  danger 
of  injuring  himself.  See  Notes  on  ver.  15.  (c)On  the  supposition  that  he  was  not,  still  there 
might  have  been  all  proper  care  taken  to  guard  him.  All  that  may  be  implied  when  it  is  said 
that  he  "  was  driven  from  men,  and  did  eat  grass  as  oxen,"  kc,  may  have  been  that  this  was  hxa 
propensity  in  that  state ;  that  he  had  this  roving  disposition,  and  was  disposed  rather  to  wander 
in  fields  and  groves,  than  to  dwell  in  the  abodes  of  men;  and  that  he  was  driven  hy  this  pro- 
pensity, not  by  men.  to  leave  his  palace,  and  to  take  up  his  residence  in  parks  or  groves — any- 
where rather  than  in  human  habitations.  This  has  been  not  an  uncommon  propensity  with 
maniiics,  and  there  is  no  improbability  in  supposing  that  this  was  permitted  by  those  who  had 
the  care  of  him,  as  far  as  was  consistent  with  his  safety,  and  with  what  was  due  to  him  as  a 
monarch,  though  his  reason  was  driven  from  its  throne.  In  the  parks  attached  to  the  palace; 
in  the  large  pleasure  grounds,  that  were  not  improbably  stocked  with  various  kinds  of  animals, 
as  a  sort  of  royal  menagerie,  there  is  no  improbability  in  supposing  that  lie  may  have  been 
allowed  at  proper  times,  and  with  suitable  guards,  to  roam,  nor  that  the  fallen  and  hum- 
bled monarch  may  have  found,  in  comparatively  lucid  intervals,  a  degree  of  plea.sant  amuse- 
ment in  such  grounds,  nor  even  that  it  might  be  supposed  that  this  would  contribute  to  his 
restoration  to  health.  Nor,  on  any  supposition  in  regard  to  these  statements,  even  admitting 
that  there  was  a  great  degree  of  criminal  inattention  on  the  p.art  of  his  friends,  would  his  treat- 
ment have  been  worse  than  what  h.as  usually  occurred  ill  respect  to  the  insane.  Up  to  quite  a 
recent  period,  and  even  now  in  many  civilized  lands,  the  insane  have  been  treated  with  the 
most  gross  neglect,  and  with  the  severest  cruelty,  even  by  their  friends.  Left  to  w.ander  where 
they  chose  without  a  protector;  unshaven  and  unwashed;  the  sj  ort  of  the  idle  and  the 
vicious;  thrown  into  common  j.tils  among  felons;  bound  with  heavy  ;hains  to  the  cold  walls 
of  dungeons ;  confined  in  cellars  or  garrets  with  no  fire  in  the  colde-jt  weather ;  with  insuffi- 
cient clothing,  perhaps  entirely  naked,  and  in  the  midst  of  the  most  disgusting  filth, — such 
treatment,  even  in  Christian  lands,  and  by  Chri-stian  people,  m.ay  show  that  in  a  heathen  land, 
five  hundred  years  before  the  light  of  Christianity  dawned  upon  the  world,  it  is  not  wholly  in- 
credible that  an  insane  monarch  might  have  been  treated  in  the  manner  described  in  this 
chapter.  If  the  best  friends  now  may  so  neglect,  or  treat  with  such  severity,  an  insane  son  or 
daughter,  there  is  no  improbability  in  supposing,  that  in  an  age  of  comparative  barbarism  there 
may  have  been  as  little  humanity  as  is  implied  in  this  chapter.  The  following  extracts  from  the 
Second  Annual  Report  of  the  Prison  Discipline  Society,  (Boston.)  will  show  what  has  occurred 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  in  this  Christian  land,  and  in  the  old  commonwealth  of  Massachu- 
setts— a  commonwealth  distinguished  for  morals,  and  for  humane  feeling,  and  will  dcmostrate  at 
the  .same  time  that  what  is  here  stated  about  the  monarch  of  heathen  Babylon  is  not  unworthy 
of  belief.  They  refer  to  the  treatment  of  lunatics  in  that  commonwealth  before  the  establishment 
of  thehospit,al  for  the  insane  at  AVorvester.  '-In  Massachusetts,  by  an  examination  made  with 
care,  about  thirty  lun.-itics  have  been  found  in  prison.  In  one  prison  were  found  three;  in  an 
other  five ;  in  another  six,  and  in  another  ten.  It  is  a  source  of  great  complaint  with  thf 
sheriffs  and  jailers  that  they  must  receive  such  persons,  because  they  have  no  suitable  accom- 
modations for  them.  Of  those  last  mentioned,  one  w.as  found  in  an  apartment  in  which  he  Iiad 
been  nine  years.  lie  had  a  wreath  of  rags  around  his  body,  and  another  arovind  his  neck. 
This  was  all  his  clothing.  He  had  no  bed,  chair,  or  bench.  Two  or  three  rough  planks  were 
»tre\red  around  the  room;  a  heap  of  filthy  straw,  like  the  nest  of  swine,  was  in  the  corner,    lie 


204  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  570 

had  Kiilt  a  bird's  nest  of  mud  in  the  iron  prrate  of  his  den.  Connected  ivith  his  wretched  apart 
mont  was  a  dark  dungeon,  haTing  no  orifice  for  the  admission  of  light,  heat,  or  air,  except  thf 
iron  door,  about  two  and  a  half  feet  square,  opening  into  it  from  the  prison.  The  other  luna' 
tics  in  the  same  prison  were  scattered  about  in  different  apartments,  with  thieves  and  mur- 
Jerers,  and  persons  under  arrest,  but  not  yet  convicted  of  guilt.  In  the  prison  of  five  lunatics, 
they  were  confined  in  separate  cells,  which  were  almost  dark  dungeons.  It  was  dillicult  after 
the  door  was  open  to  see  them  distinctly.  The  ventilation  was  so  incomplete  that  more  tlian 
one  person  on  entering  them  has  found  the  air  so  feiid  as  to  produce  nausea,  and  almost  vomit- 
ing. The  old  straw  on  which  they  were  laid,  and  their  tilthy  garments,  were  such  as  to  make 
their  insanity  more  liopelcss.  and  at  one  time  it  was  not  considered  within  the  province  of  the 
phy.sician  to  examine  particularly  the  condition  of  the  lunatics.  In  these  circumstances  any 
improvement  of  their  minds  could  hardly  be  expected.  Instead  of  having  three  out  of  four 
restored  to  reason,  as  is  the  fact  in  some  of  the  favoured  Lunatic  Asylums,  it  is  to  be  feared 
that  in  these  circumstances,  some  who  might  otherwise  be  restored  would  become  incurable, 
and  that  others  might  lose  their  lives,  to  say  nothing  of  present  ^  iffering.  In  tlie  prison 
in  which  were  six  lunatics  their  condition  was  less  wretched.  But  they  were  sometimes  an 
annoyance,  and  sometimes  a  sport  to  the  convicts;  and  even  the  apartment  in  which  tho 
females  were  confined  opened  into  the  yard  of  the  men;  there  was  an  injurious  interchange  of 
obscenity  and  profanity  between  them,  whicli  was  not  restrained  by  the  presence  of  the  keeper. 
In  the  prison,  or  house  of  correction,  so  called,  in  which  were  ten  lunatics,  two  wore  found 
about  seventy  years  of  age,  a  male  and  female,  in  the  same  apartment  of  an  upper  story.  Tho 
female  was  lying  upon  a  heap  of  straw  under  a  broken  window.  The  snow  in  a  severe  storm 
was  beating  through  the  window,  and  lay  upon  the  straw  around  her  withered  body,  which 
was  partially  covered  with  a  few  filthy  and  tattered  garments.  The  man  was  lying  in  the  cor- 
ner of  the  room  in  ,a  similar  situation,  except  tliat  he  was  less  exposed  to  the  storm.  The 
former  had  been  in  this  apartment  six,  and  the  latter  twenty-one  year.s.  Another  lunatic  in 
the  same  prison  was  found  in  a  plank  apartment  of  the  first  story,  where  he  had  been  eight 
years.  During  this  time  he  h.ad  never  left  the  room  but  twice.  The  door  of  this  apartment 
h.ad  not  been  opened  in  t'ighteen  months.  The  food  was  furnished  through  a  small  orifice 
in  the  door.  The  room  was  warmed  by  no  fire :  and  still  the  woman  of  the  house  said  'he  had 
iierrr  froze.'  As  he  was  seen  through  the  orifice  of  the  door,  the  first  question  was,  'Is  that  a 
human  being?'  The  hair  was  gone  from  one  side  of  his  head,  and  his  eyes  were  like  balls  of 
fire.  In  the  cellar  of  the  same  prison  were  five  lunatics.  The  windows  of  this  cellar  were  no 
defence  against  the  storm,  and,  as  might  be  .supposed,  the  woman  of  the  house  said,  'AVe  have 
a  sight  to  do  to  keep  them  from  freezing.'  There  was  no  fire  in  this  cellar  which  could  be  felt 
by  four  of  these  lunatics.  One  of  the  five  had  a  little  fire  of  turf  in  an  apartment  of  the  cellar 
b}-  herself.  She  was,  however,  infuriate,  if  any  one  came  near  her.  The  woman  was  com- 
mitted to  this  cellar  i^eventeen  years  ago.  The  apartments  are  about  six  feet  by  eight.  They 
are  made  of  coarse  plank,  and  have  an  orifice  in  the  door  for  the  admission  of  light  and  air, 
about  six  inches  by  four.  The  darkness  was  such  in  two  of  these  apartments,  that  nothing 
could  be  seen  by  looking  through  the  orifice  in  the  door.  At  the  same  time  there  was  a  poor 
lunatic  in  each  A  man  who  has  grown  old  was  committed  to  one  of  them  in  ISIO.  and  had 
lived  in  it  seventeen  years.  An  emaciated  female  was  found  in  a  similar  apartment,  in  the 
dark,  without  fire,  almost  without  covering,  where  she  had  been  nearly  two  years.  A  coloured 
woman  in  another,  in  which  she  had  been  six  j'ears;  and  a  miserable  man  in  another,  in 
which  he  had  been  four  years." 

(2)  It  is  asked  by  Bertholdt  as  an  objection,  (p.  SOI,)  whether  "it  is  credible  that  one  who 
had  been  for  so  long  a  time  a  maniac,  would  be  restored  again  to  the  throne;  and  whether  the 
government  would  be  again  placed  in  his  hands,  without  any  apprehension  tliat  he  would 
relapse  into  the  same  state  ?  Or  whether  it  can  be  believed  that  the  lives  and  fortunes  of  so 
many  millions  would  be  again  entrusted  to  his  will  and  power?"  To  these  questions  it  may  bo 
replied :  (a)  That  if  he  was  restored  to  his  reason  he  had  a  right  to  the  throne,  and  it  might  not 
have  been  a  doubtful  point  whether  he  .should  be  restored  to  it  or  not.  {h)\i  is  probable  that 
during  that  time  a  regency  was  appointed,  and  that  there  would  bo  a  hope  entertained  that 
he  would  be  restored.  Undoubtedly  during  the  continuation  of  this  mala<1y,  the  government 
would  be,  as  was  (he  case  during  the  somewhat  similar  malady  of  George  III.  of  Great  Britain, 
placed  in  the  ban  ts  of  others,  and  unless  there  was  a  revolution,  or  an  usurpation,  he  would 
be  of  course  restored  to  his  throne  on  the  recovery  of  his  reason,  (c)  To  this  it  may  be  added, 
that  he  was  a  monarch  who  had  been  eminently  successful  in  his  conquests;  who  had  dono 
much  to  enlarge  the  limits  of  the  empire,  and  to  adorn  the  capital;  and  that  much  was  to  bo 
apprehended  from  the  character  of  his  legal  successor,  Evil-Merodach  (Ilengstenberg  113,) :  and 
that  if  he  were  displaced,  they  who  were  then  the  chief  officers  of  the  nation  had  reason  tu 
suppose  that,  in  accordance  with  oriental  usage  on  the  accession  of  a  new  sovereign,  they  would 
lose  their  places. 

(3)  It  has  been  asked  also,  as  an  objection,  whether  "it  is  not  to  be  presumed  that  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, on  the  supposition  that  he  was  restored  from  so  fearful  a  malady,  would  not  have  em- 
ployed all  the  means  in  his  power  to  suppress  the  knowledge  of  it;  or  whether,  if  any  commu- 
nication was  made  in  regard  to  it,  pains  would  not  have  been  taken  to  give  a  colouring  to  tho 
account  by  suppressing  the  real  truth,  and  by  attributing  the  affliction  to  some  other 
'ause?"  Bertholdt,  301.  To  this  it  may  be  replied:  (a)  that  if  the  representation  here  made  of 
the  cause  of  his  malady  is  correct,  that  it  was  a  divine  judgment  on  him  for  his  pride,  and  thai 


B.  C.  570.J  CHAPTER   IV.  205 

God's  design  in  bringiug  it  on  him  was  thut  he  himself  mi^ht  he  made  kiioirn,  it  isrearonahlc  tc 
prosumo  that,  on  his  restoration,  there  would  he  such  a  divine  influence  on  the  mind  of  the 
monarch,  .as  to  load  him  to  make  this  proclamation,  or  this  public  recognition  of  the  Most  High  ; 
(6)  that  the  edict  seems  to  have  been  made,  not  as  a  matter  of  policy,  but  under  the  fresh  recol- 
lection of  a  restoration  from  so  terrible  a  calamity;  (c)  that  Nebuchadnezzar  seems  to  have  been 
a  man  who  had  a  conscience  that  prompted  him  to  a  decided  acknowledgment  of  divine  inter- 
position ;  (a)  that  he  had  a  strong  religious  propensity  (comp.  ch.  iii.).  and  was  ready  to  make 
any  public  acknowledgment  of  that  which  he  regarded  as  divine ;  aud  (e)  that  perhaps  he  sup- 
posed that,  by  stating  the  truth  as  it  actually  occurred,  a  better  impression  might  be  made 
than  ah-eady  existed  in  reg.ard  to  the  nature  of  the  malady.  It  viai/  h.ave  been  an  object  also 
with  him  to  convince  his  subjects  that,  although  he  had  been  deprived  of  his  reason,  he  was 
now  in  fact  restored  to  a  sound  mind. 

(4.)  Another  ground  of  objection  has  been  urged  by  Eichhom,  Eertholdt,  and  others,  derived 
from  the  character  of  the  edict.  It  is  said  that  '-the  narrative  represents  Nebuchadnezzar  at 
cne  time  as  an  orthodox  Jew,  setting  forth  his  views  almost  in  the  very  words  used  in  the  writ- 
ings of  the  Jews,  and  which  only  a  Jew  would  employ,  (see  vs.  2,  3,  34 — 37,)  and  then  again  ai 
a  mere  idolater,  using  the  language  which  an  idolater  would  employ,  and  still  acknowledging 
the  reality  of  idol  gods,  vs.  8,  9,  IS."  To  this  it  m.ay  be  replied,  that  this  very  circumstance  is 
r.ather  a  confirmation  of  the  truth  of  the  account  than  otherwise.  It  is  just  such  an  account 
as  we  should  suppose  that  a  monarch,  trained  up  in  idolatry,  and  practising  it  all  his  life,  and 
yet  suddenly,  and  in  this  impressive  manner,  made  acquainted  with  the  true  God,  would  be 
likely  to  give.  In  an  edict  published  by  such  a  monarch  under  such  circumstances,  it  would 
be  strange  if  there  should  be  no  betrayal  of  the  fact  that  he  had  been  a  worshipper  of  heathen 
gods,  nor  would  it  be  strange  that  when  he  disclosed  his  dream  to  Daniel,  asking  him  to  inter- 
pret it,  and  professing  to  believe  that  he  was  under  the  influence  of  inspiration  from  above,  he 
should  trace  it  to  the  gods  in  general,  vs.  8,  9,  18.  And,  in  like  manner,  if  the  thing  actually 
occurred,  as  is  related,  it  would  be  certain  that  he  would  use  such  language  in  describing  it  as 
an  '  orthcKlox  Jew'  might  use.  It  is  to  he  remembered  that  he  is  represented  as  obtaining  his 
view  of  what  was  meant  by  the  vision  from  Daniel,  and  nothing  is  more  probable  than  that  he 
would  use  such  language  as  Daniel  would  have  suggested.  It  could  not  be  supposed  that  one 
who  had  been  an  idolater  all  his  life  would  soon  efface  from  his  mind  all  the  impressions  made 
by  the  habit  of  Idolatry,  so  that  no  traces  of  it  would  appear  in  a  proclamation  on  an  occasion 
like  this;  nor  could  it  be  supposed  that  there  would  be  no  recognition  of  Ood  as  the  true  God. 
Nothing  would  be  more  natural  than  such  an  intermingling  of  false  notions  with  the  true. 
Indeed,  there  is  in  fact  scarcely  any  circumstance  in  regard  to  this  chapter  that  has  more  the 
air  of  authenticity,  nor  could  there  well  be  anything  more  probable  in  itself,  than  what  is  here 
stated.  It  is  just  such  an  intermingling  of  truth  with  falsehood  as  we  should  expect  in  a  mind 
trained  in  heathenism,  and  yet  this  is  a  circumstance  which  would  not  be  very  likely  to  occur 
to  one  who  attempted  a  forgery,  or  who  endeavored  to  draw  the  character  of  a  heathen  mon- 
arch in  such  circumstances  without  authentic  materials.  If  the  edict  was  the  work  of  a  Jew, 
he  would  have  been  likely  to  represent  its  author  without  any  remains  of  heathenism  in  his 
mind ;  if  it  were  the  work  of  a  heathen,  there  would  have  been  no  such  recognition  of  the  true 
God.  If  it  is  a  mere  fiction,  the  artifice  is  too  refined  to  have  been  likely  to  occur,  to  attempt 
to  draw  him  in  this  state  of  mind,  where  there  was  an  intermingling  of  falsehood  with  truth  ; 
of  the  remains  of  all  his  old  habits  of  thinking,  with  new  and  momentous  truths  that  had  just 
begun  to  dawn  on  his  mind.  The  supposition  that  will  best  suit  all  the  circumstances  of  the 
case,  and  be  liable  to  the  fewest  objections,  is,  that  the  account  is  an  unvarnished  statement 
of  what  actually  occurred.  On  the  whole  subject  of  the  objections  to  this  chapter,  the  reader 
may  consult  Ilengstenberg,  Die  Authentic  des  Daniel,  pp.  100 — 119.  For  many  of  the  remarks 
here  made,  I  am  indebted  to  that  work.     Comp.  further  the  Notes  on  vs.  25,  seq.  of  the  chapter. 


§  2.   ANALYSIS  OF  THE  CHAPTER. 

The  chapter  professes  to  be  an  edict  published  by  Nebuchadnezzar  after  his  recovery  from  a 
long  period  of  insanity  which  was  brought  upon  him  forhis  pride.  The  edict  was  promulgated 
with  a  view  to  lead  men  to  acknowledge  the  true  God.  It  states,  in  general,  that  the  appro.ach 
of  his  calamity  was  m.ade  known  to  him  in  a  dream,  which  was  interpreted  by  Daniel  ;that  his 
own  heart  had  been  lifted  up  with  pride  in  view  of  the  splendid  city  which  he  had  built;  that 
the  predicted  malady  came  suddenly  upon  him,  even  while  be  was  indulging  in  these  proud 
reflections;  that  he  was  driven  away  from  the  abodes  of  men,  a  poor  neglected  maniac;  tha". 
he  again  recovered  his  reason,  and  then  his  throne;  .and  that  the  God  who  had  thus  humbled 
him,  and  again  restored  him,  was  the  true  God,  and  was  worthj'  of  universal  adoration  and 
praise.     The  edict,  therefore,  embraces  the  following  parts  : 

I.  The  reason  why  it  was  promulgated — to  show  to  all  people,  dwelling  in  all  parts  of  the 
ei»rth,  the  great  things  which  the  high  God  had  done  towards  him,  vs.  1 — 3. 

II.  The  statement  of  the  fact  that  he  had  had  a  dream  which  greatly  alarmed  him,  and  which 
lione  of  the  'Jhdldean  soothsayers  had  been  able  to  interpret,  vs.  4 — 7. 

III.  The  statement  of  the  dream  in  full  to  Daniel,  vs.  8 — 18. 

lA'.  The  interpretation  of  tVe  dream  by  Daniel — predicting  the  fact  that  he  would  become  t 
18 


206 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  570 


Bxanlac,  and  would  be  driven  from  his  throue  and  kingdom,  and  compelled  to  take  np  hlf 
abode  with  the  beasts  of  the  field — a  poor  neglected  outcast,  vs.  19 — 26. 

V.  The  solemn  and  faithful  counsel  of  Daniel  to  him  to  break  off  his  fins,  and  to  become  a 
righteous  man,  if  possibly  the  terrible  calamity  mijiht  bo  averted,  ver.  27. 

VI.  The  fulfilment  of  the  prediction  of  Daniel.  Nebuchadnezzar  was  walking  on  his  palace, 
and,  in  the  pride  of  his  beurt,  surveying  the  great  city  which  he  had  built,  and  suddenly  a 
voice  from  heaven  addressed  him  announcing  that  his  kingdom  had  departed,  and  his  reason 
left  him,  vs.  28 — 3.3. 

A'll.  At  the  end  of  the  appointed  time,  his  reason  was  restored,  and  he  gratefully  acknow- 
ledged the  divine  sovereignty,  and  was  again  reinstated  on  his  throne,  vs.  3i — 36. 

VIII.  for  all  this  he  says  that  he  praised  the  God  of  heaven,  for  he  had  learned  that  all  his 
works  are  truth,  and  his  ways  judgment,  and  that  those  who  walk  in  pride  he  is  able  to  abase, 
Tcr.  37. 


1  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king,  » un- 
to all  people,  nations,  and  languages, 
that  dwell  in  all  the  earth ;  Peace 
b  be  multiplied  unto  you. 

ac.3.4;  6.25-27.  blPe.  1.  2. 

1.  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king,  unto  all 
■people,  Ac.  The  Syriac  here  has,  'Ne- 
buchadnezzar the  king  icrote  to  all  peo- 
ple,' Ac.  Many  manuscripts  in  the  Chal- 
dee  have  n^y'  —  sent,  and  some  have  an? — 
wrote,  but  neither  of  these  readings  are 
probably  genuine,  nor  are  they  necessary. 
The  passage  is  rather  a  part  of  the  edict 
of  the  king  than  a  narrative  of  the  author 
of  the  book,  and  in  such  an  edict  the 
comparatively  abrupt  style  of  the  present 
reading  would  be  that  whieli  would  be 
adopted.  The  Septungint  has  inserted 
here  a  historical  statement  of  the  fact 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  did  actually  issue 
such  an  edict:  "And  Nebuchadnezzar, 
the  king,  wrote  an  encyclical  epistle — 
f.niaTo\))ii  cyKiKKiov — to  all  those  nations  in 
every  place,  and  to  the  regions,  and  to  all 
the  tongues  that  dwell  in  all  countries, 
generations  and  generations  :  '  Nebuchad- 
nezzar the  king,'"  <tc.  But  nothing  of  this 
is  in  the  original.  ^  Unto  all  peojyle,  na- 
tions, and  languages  that  dwell  in  all  the 
earth.  That  is,  people  speaking  all  the 
languages  of  the  earth.  Many  nations 
were  under  the  sceptre  of  the  king  of 
Babylon,  but  it  would  seem  that  he 
designed  this  as  a  general  proclamation, 
not  only  to  those  who  were  embraced  in 
his  empire,  but  to  all  the  people  of  the 
world.  Such  a  proclamation  would  be 
much  in  accordance  with  the  Oriental 
style.  Comp.  Notes  on  ch.  iii.  4.  ^[  Peace 
he  multiplied  unto  you.  This  is  in  accor- 
d.ance  with  the  usual  Oriental  salutation. 
Comp.  Gen.  zliii.  23;  Judges  vi.  23 ;  1. 
Sam.  XXV.  6 ;   Ps.  cxxii.  7 ;    Luke  x.  5 ; 


2  <:  I  thought  it  good  to  show  the 
signs  and  wonders  that  the  high 
''God  hath  wrought  toward  me. 

'  It  was  seemly  before  me.        A  c.  3.  26. 


Eph.  vi.  23 ;  1.  Pet.  i.  2.  This  is  the  salu- 
tation with  which  one  meets  another  now 
in  the  Oriental  world — the  same  word  still 
being  retained,  Shalom,  or  Salam.  The? 
idea  seemed  to  be,  that  every  blessing  was 
found  in  peace,  and  every  evil  in  conflict 
and  war.  The  expression  included  the 
wish  that  they  might  be  preserved  from 
all  that  would  disturb  them  ;  that  they 
might  be  contented,  quiet,  prosperous, 
and  happy.  AVhen  it  is  said  'peace  be 
mxdtiplied,'  ^e  wish  is  that  it  might 
abound,  or  that  they  might  be  blessed 
with  the  numberless  mercies  which  peace 
produces. 

2.  /  thought  it  good.  Marg.,  it  wat 
seemhj  before  me.  The  marginal  reading 
is  more  in  accordance  with  the  original 
— ''P'Ji?.  I5"f'.  The  proper  meaning  of  the 
Chaldee  word  —  nbp'  —  is  to  be  fair  or 
beautiful,  and  the  sense  here  is  that  i* 
seemed  to  him  to  be  appropriate  or  be 
coming  to  make  this  public  proclamation. 
It  was  fit  and  right  that  what  God  had 
done  to  bim  should  be  proclaimed  to  all 
nations.  ^  To  show  the  signs  and  wonders. 
Signs  and  wonders  as  denoting  mighty 
miracles,  are  not  unfrequently  connected 
in  the  Scriptures.  See  Ex.  vii.  3 ;  Deut. 
iv.  34,  xii.  1,  xxxiv.  11;  Isa.  viii.  18; 
Josh,  xxxii.  20.  The  word  rendered  signs, 
Heb.  niK,  Chaldee  rx,  means  properly  a 
sign,  as  something  significant,  or  some- 
thing that  points  out  or  designates  any- 
thing, as  Gen.  i.  14,  "Shall  be  ior  signs 
and  for  seasons;"  that  is,  signs  of  sea- 
sons. Then  the  word  denotes  an  ensign, 
a  military  flag.  Num.  ii.  2;  then  a  sign  of 


B.  C.  570.] 


CHAPTER   IV 


207 


3  How  great  arc  his  » signs!  and 
how  mighty  are  his  b wonders!  his 
kingdom  is  an   everlasting  =  king- 

•  De.  4.  34.     Vs.  105.  27.      He.  2. 4. 


dom,    and   his   dominion   ^is  from 
generation  to  generation. 


bPs. 

<:  c.  2. 44. 


72.18;  fC.lO.    Ts.2,5.1;  28.29. 
Re.  11. 15.      d  Job  25. 2.      lPe.4.11. 


Eomething  past,  a  token  or  remembrancer, 
Ex.  xiii.  9,  16;  Deut.  vi.  8;  then  a  sign 
of  something  future,  a  portent,  an  omen, 
Isa.  viii.  18  ;  then  a  sign  or  token  of  what 
is  visible,  as  circumcision.  Gen.  xvii.  7, 
or  the  rainbow  in  the  cloud,  as  a  token  of 
the  covenant  which  God  made  with  man, 
Gen.  ix.  12 ;  then  anything  which  serves 
as  a  sign  or  proof  of   the  fulfilment  of 
prophecy,  Ex.  iii.  12,    ISara.  ii.  34;    and 
then  it  refers  to  anything  which  is  a  sign 
or  proof  of  divine  power,  Deut.  iv.  34,  vi. 
2.2,  vii.  19,  ct  riL     The  Hebrew  word    is 
commonly  rendered  sifjns,  but  it   is  also 
rendered  token,  ensign,  miracles.     As  ap- 
plied to  what  God  does,  it  seems  to  be 
used  in  the  sense  of  anything  that  is  sig- 
nificant of  his  presence  and  power;  any- 
thing that  shall  manifestly  show  that  what 
occurs  is  done  by  him  ;  anything  that  is 
beyond    human  ability,  and  that   makes 
known  the  being  and  the  perfections  of 
God  by  a  direct  and  extraordinary  mani- 
festation.    Here  the  meaning  is,  that  what 
was  done  in  so  remarkable  a  manner,  was 
sirjuijieant  of  the  agency  of  God ;  it  was 
that  which  demonstrated  that  he  exists, 
and  that  showed  his  greatness.    The  word 
rendered  iconders — np.n — means  properly 
that  which  is  fitted  to  produce  astonish- 
ment, or  to  lead  one  to  wonder;   and  is 
applied  to  miracles  as  adapted  to  produce 
tliatcflect.     It  refers  to  that  state  of  mind 
which  exists  where  anything  occurs  out  of 
the  ordinary  course  of  nature,  or   which 
indicates   supernatural   power.     The  He- 
brew word  rendered  iconders  is  often  nsed 
to  denote  miracles,  Ex.  iii.  20,  vii.  3,  xi.  9; 
Djut.  vi.  22,  et  al.     The  meaning  here  is, 
that  what  had  occurred  was  fitted  to  ex- 
cite amazement,  and  to  lead  men  to  won- 
der at  the  mighty  works  of  God.     •[  That 
the  hiijh  God.     The  God  who  is  exalted, 
iir  lifted  up  ;  that  is,  the  God  who  is  above 
ill.     See  ch.  iii.  26.     It  is  an  appellation 
nhich  would  be  given  to  God  as  the  Su- 
preme Being.     The  Greek  translation  of 
ihis  verse  is,  "And  now  I  show  unto  you 
the  deeds — rpiijtij — which  the  great  God 
bas  done  unto  me,  for  it  seemed  good  to 
me  to  show  to  you  and  your  wise  men — " 
.•01  f  (jo^iffrdif   i/iui 


and  wonderful  are  the  things  by  which 
ho  makes  himself  known  in  this  manner  ! 
The  allusion  is  doubtless  to  what  had  oc- 
curred to  himself — the  event  by  which  a 
monarch  of  such  state    and   power  had 
been  reduced  to  a  condition  so  humble. 
■VVith  propriety  he' would    regard  this  as 
a  signal   instance  of  the  divine   interpo- 
sition, and    as    adapted   to  give  him  an 
exalted   view  of    the    supremacy  of    the 
true  God.     ^  And  how  miijhtij  are  his  won- 
ders .'     The  wonderful  events  which  he 
does ;  the  things  fitted  to  produce  admi- 
ration and  astonishment.  Corap.  Ps.  Ixxii. 
IS,  Ixxxvi.  10;  Isa.  xxv.  1.     *^ His  king- 
dom  is   a)i  everlasting   kingdom.     Nebu- 
chadnezzar was  doubtless  led  to  this  re- 
flection   by  what   had   occurred    to  him. 
He,  the  most  mighty   monarch   then  on 
earth,  had  seen   that  his  throne  had  no 
stability  ;  he  had  seen  that  God  had  power 
at  his  will  to  bring  him  down  from  his 
lofty  seat,  and  to  transfer  his   authority 
to  other  hands  ;  and  he  was  naturally  led 
to  reflect  that  the  throne  of  God  was  the 
only  one  that  was  stable  and  permanent. 
He  could  not  but  be  convinced  that  God 
reigned   over  all,  and  that  his  kingdom 
was  not  subject  to  the  vicissitudes  which 
occur    in    the   kingdoms    of    this   world. 
There  have  been  few  occurrences  on  the 
earth  better  adapted  to  teach  this  lesson 
than  this.     *^,  And  his  dominion  is  from 
generation   to  generation.     That   is,   it  is 
perpetual.     It  is  not  liable  to  be  arrested 
as  that  of  man  is,  by  death ;  it  does  not 
pass  over  from  one  family  to  another  as 
an  earthly  sceptre  often  does.     The  same 
sceptre;    the   same   system  of  laws;  the 
same     providential    arrangements ;     the 
same  methods  of  reward  and  punishment, 
have  always  existed    under   bis   govern- 
ment, and  will  continue  to  do  so  to  the 
end  of  time.     There  is  perhaps  no  more 
I  sublime  view  that  can   be  taken  of  the 
government  of  God  than  this.   All  earthly 
princes  die ;    all  authority  lodged  in  the 
hands  of  an  earthly  monarch  is  soon  with- 
drawn.    No  one  is  so  mighty  that  he  can 
prolong  his  own  reign  ;    and  no  one  can 
make  his  own   authority  extend   to  the 
next   generation.     Earthly  governments, 
therefore,  however   mighty,  are  of  short 


3.  How  great  are  his  signs!    How  great  |  duration  ;  and  history  is  made  up  of  the 


208 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  570 


4  Tf  I  Nebuchadnezzar  was  at  rest 
In  mine  house,  and  flourishing  in  my 
palace: 

5  I  saw  a  dream  which  made  me 
afraid,  and  the  thoughts  upon  my  bed 


records  of  a  great  number  of  such  ad- 
ministrations, many  of  them  exceedincrly 
brief,  and  of  very  various  character.  The 
sccptro  falls  from  the  hand  of  the  mon- 
arch, never  to  be  resumed  by  him  again  ; 
another  grasps  it  to  retain  it  also  but  a 
little  time,  and  then  he  passes  a^va}'.  But 
the  dominion  of  God  is  in  all  generations 
the  same.  This  generation  is  under  the 
government  of  the  same  sovereign  who 
reigned  when  Semiramis  or  Numa  lived  ; 
and  though  the  sceptre  has  long  since 
fallen  from  the  hands  of  Alexander  and 
the  Cffisars,  yet  the  same  God,  who  ruled 
in  their  age,  is  still  on  the  throne. 

4.  I  Nebuchadnezznr  teas  at  rest.  Some 
manuscripts  in  the  Greek  add  here,  "  In 
the  eighteenth  year  of  his  reign,  Kebu- 
chadnezzar  said."  Tliese  words,  however, 
are  not  in  the  Hebrew,  and  are  of  no  au- 
thoritj'.  The  word  rendered  'at  rest' — 
rhv  —  means  to  be  secure ;  to  be  free  from 
apprehension  or  alarm.  He  designs  to 
describe  a  state  of  tranquillity  and  secu- 
rity. Gr.  at  2^eace — £i"f)'?»'ci'wi/: — enjoj'ing 
peace,  or  in  a  condition  to  enjoy  peace. 
His  wars  were  over;  his  kingdom  was 
tranquil :  he  had  built  a  magnificent  capi- 
tal ;  he  had  gathered  around  him  the 
wealth  and  the  luxuries  of  the  world, 
and  he  was  now  in  a  condition  to  pass 
away  the  remainder  of  his  life  in  ease  and 
happiness.  %  In  mine  house.  In  his  roj'al 
residence.  It  is  possible  that  the  two 
words  here — house  and^jo^rrcc — may  refer 
to  somewhat  different  things  :  the  for- 
mer— house — more  particularly  to  his  own 
private  family — his  domestic  relations  as 
a  man;  and  the  latter — palace — to  those 
connected  with  the  government  who  re- 
sided in  his  palace.  If  this  is  so,  then 
the  passage  would  mean  that  all  around 
him  was  peaceful,  and  that  from  no  source 
had  he  any  cause  of  disquiet.  In  his  own 
private  family — embracing  his  wife  and 
children  ;  and  in  the  arrangements  of  the 
palace — embracing  those  who  had  charge 
of  public  affairs,  he  had  no  cause  of  un- 
easiness. *\  And  flourish  inrf  in  my  palaee. 
6r.     tv'iriiwii    iiri    tov  Jpdion  fiov — literally, 

abundant  upon  my  throne;'  that  is,  be 


and  the  visions  of  my  head  troubled 
nie. 

6  Therefore  made  I  a  decree  to 
bring  in  all  the  wise  meii  of  Baby* 
Ion  before  me,  that  they  might  make 


was  tranquil,  calm,  prosperous,  on  hia 
throne.  The  Chaldee  word  —  ?j;n  — 
means  properly  green,  as,  for  example,  of 
leaves  or  foliage.  Comp.  the  Hebrew 
word  in  Jer.  xvii.  S  :  "  He  shall  be  as  .i 
tree  planted  by  the  waters — her  leaf  shall 
be  green."  Deut.  xii.  2.  "  Under  every 
fjreen  tree,"  2  Kings  xvi.  4.  A  green 
and  flourishing  tree  becomes  thus  the  em- 
blem of  prosperity.  See  Ps.  i.  3,  xxxvii. 
.35,  xcii.  12 — 14.  The  general  meaning 
here  is,  that  he  was  enjoying  abundant 
prosperity.  His  kingdom  was  at  peace, 
and  in  liis  own  home  he  had  every  means 
of  tranquil  enjoyment. 

5.  /  sate  a  dream.  That  is,  he  saw  a 
representation  made  to  him  in  a  dream. 
There  is  something  incongruous  in  our 
language  in  saying  of  one  that  he  soip  a 
dream.  %  Which  made  me  afraid.  The 
fear  evidently  arose  from  the  apprehen- 
sion that  it  was  designed  to  disclose  some 
important  and  solemn  event.  This  was 
in  accordance  with  a  prevalent  belief  then 
(comp.  ch.  ii.  1),  and  it  may  be  added  that 
it  is  in  accordance  with  a  prevalent  be- 
lief now.  There  are  few  persons,  what- 
ever may  be  their  abstract  belief,  who  are 
not  more  or  less  disturbed  by  fearful  and 
solemn  representations  passing  before  the 
mind  in  the  visions  of  the  night.  Comp. 
Job  iv.  12 — 17,  xxxiii.  14,  15.  So  Virgil 
(^n.  iv.  9.) 

Anna  Sorer,  quaj  me  suspcnsam  insomnia 
terrtnt  ? 

*[  And  the  ihour/hts  upon  my  lied.  The 
thoughts  which  I  had  upon  my  bed :  to 
wit,  in  my  dream.  %  And  (he  visions  of  m-ij 
head.  What  I  seemed  to  see.  The  vision 
seemed  to  be  floating  around  his  head. 
%  Troubled  me.  Disturbed  me;  produced 
apprehension  of  what  was  to  come:  of 
some  great  and  important  event. 

6.  Therefore  made  I  a  decree.  The- 
word  here  rendered  decree  —  c>  15  —  means 
commonlj'  taste,  flavour,  as  of  wine  ;  then 
judgment,  discernment,  reason  ;  and  then 
a  judgment  of  a  king,  a  mandate,  edict 
Comp.  ch.  iii.  10.  The  primary  notion 
seems  to  be  that  of  a  delicate  taste  en* 


B.  C.  570.] 


CHAPTER    IV, 


209 


knoAvn  unto  me  the  interpretation  of 
the  dream. 

7  Then  a  came  in  the  magicians, 
the  astrologers,  the  Chaldeans,  and 
the  soothsayers :  and  1  told  the 
dream  before  them ;  but  they  did 
not  make  known  unto  me  the  inter- 
pretation thereof. 


abling  one  to  determine  the  qualities  of 
wines,  viands,  &e. ;  and  then  a  delicate 
and  nice  discrimination  in  regard  to  the 
qualities  of  actions.  The  word  thus  ex- 
presses a  sound  and  accurate  judgment, 
and  is  applied  to  a  decree  or  edict,  as  de- 
clared by  one  who  had  the  qualifications 
to  express  such  a  judgment.  Here  it 
means  that  he  issued  a  ro3'al  order  to 
summon  into  his  presence  all  who  could 
be  supposed  to  be  qualified  to  explain  the 
dream.  The  Greek  (Cod.  Chisian.)  omits 
verses  G,  7,  8,  and  'J.  ^  To  br{)ifj  in  all  the 
wise  men,  &c.  Particularly  such  as  are 
enumerated  in  the  following  verse.  Comp. 
ch.  ii.  12.  It  was  in  accordance  with  his 
habit  thus  to  call  in  the  wise  men  who 
were  retained  at  court  to  give  counsel, 
and  to  explain  those  things  which  seemed 
to  be  an  intimation  of  the  divine  will. 
See  Xotes  on  ch.  ii.  2.  Comp.  also  Gen. 
xli.  8. 

7.  Then  came  in  the  marjicians,  Ac.  All 
the  words  occurring  here  are  found  in  ch. 
ii.  2,  and  are  explained  in  the  Notes  on 
that  verse,  except  the  word  rendered 
soothsai/era.  This  occurs  in  ch.  ii.  27. 
See  it  explained  in  the  Notes  on  that 
verse.  All  these  words  refer  to  the  same 
general  class  of  persons — those  who  were 
regarded  as  endued  with  eminent  wisdom; 
who  were  supposed  to  be  qualified  to  ex- 
plain remnrkable  occurrences,  to  foretel 
the  future,  and  to  declare  the  will  of 
heaven  from  portents  and  wonders.  At 
a  time  when  there  was  j-et  a  limited  re- 
velation ;  when  the  boundaries  of  science 
were  not  determined  with  accuracy  ;  when 
it  was  not  certain  Imt  that  some  way 
Mi<//it  be  ascertained  of  lifling  the  mj'ste- 
rious  veil  from  the  I'uture,  and  when  it 
was  an  open  question  whether  that  might 
not  be  by  dreams  or  by  communication 
""ith  departed  spirit?,  or  by  some  undis- 
closed secrets  of  nature,  it  was  not  un- 
natural that  persons  should  be  found  who 
claimed  that  this  knowledge  was  under, 
their  control.  Such  claimants  to  preter- 1 
18* 


8  1[  But  at  the  last  Daniel  came  in 
before  me,  whose  name  ^was  Belte- 
shazzar,  according  to  the  name  of 
my  god,  and  in  whom  is  the  spirit  <=  of 
the  holy  gods  :  and  before  him  I  told 
the  dream,  saying, 


a  c.  2. 1,2. 

c  Xu.  11. 17,  ic. 


be.  l.; 
Is.  C3. 11. 


natural  knowledge  are  found  indeed  in 
every  age;  and  though  a  large  portion  of 
them  are  undoubted  deceivers,  yet  the 
existence  of  such  an  order  of  "persons 
should  be  regarded  as  merely  the  exj^o- 
nent  of  the  deep  and  earnest  desire  exi.=t- 
ing  in  the  human  bosom  to  penetrate  the 
mysterious  future;  to  find  somethinr/  that 
shall  disclose  to  man,  all  whose  great  in- 
terests lie  in  the  future,  what  is  yet  to  be. 
Comp.  the  remarks  at  the  close  of  ch.  ii. 
^^»(/  /  told  the  dream  before  them,  &c. 
In  their  presence.  In  this  instance  he 
did  not  lay  on  tliem  so  hard  a  requisition 
as  he  did  on  a  former  occasion,  when  he 
required  them  not  only  to  interpret  the 
dream,  but  to  tell  him  what  it  was.  ch.  ii. 
But  their  pretended  power  here  was 
equally  vain.  AVhethcr  they  attempted 
an  interpretation  of  this  dream  does  not 
appear;  but  if  they  did,  it  was  wholly  un- 
satisfactory to  the  king  himself.  It  would 
seem  more  probable  that  they  supposed 
that  the  dream  might  have  some  reference 
to  the  proud  monarch  himself,  and  that, 
as  it  indicated  some  awful  calamit}',  they 
did  not  dare  to  hazard  a  conjecture  in 
regard  to  its  meaning. 

S.  But  at  the  last.  After  the  others  had 
shown  that  they  could  not  interpret  the 
dream.  AViiy  Daniel  was  not  called  with 
the  others  does  not  appear;  nor  is  it  said 
in  what  manner  he  was  at  last  summoned 
into  the  presence  of  the  king.  It  is  pro- 
bable that  his  skill  on  a  former  occasion 
(ch.  ii.)  was  remembered,  and  that  when 
all  the  others  showed  that  they  had  no 
power  to  interpret  the  dream,  he  was 
called  in  by  Nebuchadnezzar.  The  Latin 
Vulgate  renders  this,  Donee  collega  in- 
gressus  est — "  until  a  colleague  entered." 
The  Greek  eo);,  until.  Aquila  and  Sym- 
machus  render  it,  'until  another  entered 
before  me,  Daniel.'  The  common  ver- 
sion expresses  the  sense  of  the  Chaldee, 
with  sutficieut  accuracy,  though  a  more 
literal  translation  would  be,  '  until  after- 
wards.'    ^  Wkoae  name  was  Belteshazxar^ 


210 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  570 


9  0  Belteshazzar,  master  of  the 
magicians,  because  I  know  that  the 
spirit  of  the  holy  gods  is  in  thee, 
and  no  secret  troubleth  *  thee,  tell 

That  is,  this  was  the  name  which  he  bore 
at  court,  or  which  had  been  given  him  by 
the  Chaldeans.  See  Notes  on  ch.  i.  7. 
%  According  to  the  name  of  my  God.  That 
is,  the  name  of  my  God  JBel,  or  Belus,  is 
incorporated  in  the  name  given  to  him. 
This  is  referred  to  here,  probably,  to  show 
the  propriety  of  thus  invoking  his  aid; 
because  he  bore  the  name  of  the  God 
whom  the  monarch  had  adored.  There 
would  seem  to  be  a  special  fitness  in  sum- 
moning him  before  him  to  explain  what  was 
supposed  to  be  an  intimation  of  the  will  of 
the  God  whom  he  worshipped.  There  is  a 
singular,  though  not  unnatural,  mixture 
of  the  sentiments  of  heathenism  and  of 
the  true  religion  in  the  expressions  which 
this  monarch  uses  in  this  chapter.  He 
had  been  a  heathen  all  his  life.  Yet  he 
had  had  some  knowledge  of  the  true  God, 
and  had  been  made  to  feel  that  he  was 
worthy  of  universal  adoration  and  praise, 
ch.  ii.  That,  in  this  state  of  mind,  he 
should  alternately  express  such  senti- 
ments as  were  originated  by  heathenism, 
and  those  which  spring  from  just  views 
of  God,  is  not  unnatural  or  improbable. 
^  And  in  whom  is  tlie  spirit  of  the  holy 
gods.  It  is  not  easy  to  determine  who 
he  meant  by  the  holy  ijods.  It  would 
seem  probable  that  this  was  such  language 
as  was  dictated  by  the  fact  that  he  had 
been  an  idolater.  He  had  been  brought 
to  feel  that  the  God  whom  Daniel  wor- 
shipped, and  by  whose  aid  he  had  been 
enabled  to  interpret  the  dream,  was  a  true 
God,  and  was  worthy  of  universal  bo- 
mage;  but  perhaps  his  ideas  were  still 
much  confused,  and  he  only  regarded 
him  as  superior  to  all  others,  though  he 
did  not  intend  to  deny  the  real  existence 
of  others.  It  might  be  true,  in  his  ap- 
prehension, that  there  were  other  gods, 
though  the  God  of  Daniel  was  supreme, 
and  perhaps  he  meant  to  say  that  the 
spirit  of  utl  the  gods  was  in  Daniel  : — 
tliat  in  an  eminent  degree  he  was  the 
favourite  of  heaven,  and  that  he  was  able 
t/)  interpret  nny  communication  which 
came  from  the  invisible  world.  It  is  per- 
haps unnecessary  to  observe  here  that  the 
Word  spirit  has  no  intended  reference  to 
the    Holy  Spirit.      It  is  probably  used 


me  the  visions  of  my  dream  that  1 
have  seen,  and  tJie  interpretation 
thereof. 

sis.  GO. IS;  54. 14. 


with  reference  to  the  belief  that  the  gods 
were  accustomed  to  impart  wisdom  and 
knowledge  to  certain  men,  and  maj'  mean 
that  the  very  spirit  of  wisdom  and  know- 
ledge which  dwelt  in  the  gods  themselves 
seemed  to  dwell  in  the  bosom  of  Daniel. 
^  And  before  him  I  told  the  dream.  Not 
requiring  him,  as  he  did  before  (ch.  ii.),  to 
state  both  the  dream  and  its  meaning. 

9.  0  Belteshazzar,  master  of  the  magi- 
cians. '  Master'  in  the  sense  that  he  was 
first  among  them,  or  was  superior  to  them 
all.  Or  perhaps  he  still  retained  office 
at  the  head  of  this  class  of  men — the 
ofiice  to  which  he  had  been  appointed 
when  he  interpreted  the  former  dream, 
ch.  ii.  48.  The  word  rendered  master — 
2-\ — Rab,  is  that  which  was  applied  to  a 
teacher,  a  chief,  or  a  great  man  among  the 
Jews — from  whence  came  the  title  lUdli. 
Comp.  ch.  ii.  48,  v.  11.  •[  Because  I  know 
that  the  spirit  of  the  holy  gods  is  in  thee. 
This  he  had  learned  by  the  skill  which  he 
had  shown  in  interpreting  his  dream  on  a 
former  occasion,  ch.  ii.  *l  And  no  secret 
trovhlcth  thee.  That  is,  so  troubles  you 
that  you  cannot  explain  it;  it  is  not  be- 
yond j'our  power  to  disclose  its  significa- 
tion. The  word  rendered  secret —  T\  — 
occurs  in  ch.  ii.  IS,  19,  27,  28,  29,  30,  47. 
It  is  not  elsewhere  found.  It  means  that 
which  is  hidden,  and  has  reference  here 
to  the  concealed  truth  or  intimation  of 
the  divine  will  couched  under  a  dream. 
The  word  rendered  *  tronhleth  thee' — 
d:!X — means,  to  urge,  to  press,  to  compel; 
and  the  idea  here  is,  that  it  did  not  so 
press  upon  him  as  to  give  him  anxiety. 
It  was  an  easy  matter  for  him  to  disclose 
its  meaning.  Gr.  '•  No  mystery  is  be- 
yond your  power" — oiK  dSwaru  ac.  ^  Tell 
me  the  visions  of  my  dream.  The  nature 
of  the  vision,  or  the  purport  of  what  I  have 
seen.  He  seems  to  have  desired  to  know 
what  sort  of  a  vision  he  should  regard 
this  to  be,  as  well  as  its  interpretation — 
whether  as  an  intimation  of  the  divine 
will,  or  as  an  ordinary  dream.  Tho 
Greek  and  Arabic  render  this,  "Hear 
the  vision  of  my  dream,  and  tell  me  the 
interpretation  thereof."  This  accords 
better  with  the  probable  meaning  of  tho 


CHAPTER    IV. 


211 


B.  C.  570.] 

10  Thus  tcere  the  visions  of  myf  11  The  tree  grew,  and -tv.vs  strong, 
head  in  my  bed;  I  »  saw,  and  be- j  and  the  height  thereof  reached  unto 
hold  a  I' ti-ee  in  the  midst  of  the  heaven,  and  the  sight  thereof  to  tho 
earth,  and  the  height  thereof  zyas  j  end  of  all  the  earth. 

12  The  leaves  thereof  loere  fair, 
and  the  fruit  thereof  much,  and  in  it 


great 

'  ivas  seeing 


''Eze.31.  3,  &c. 


passage,  though  the  word  hear  is  not  in 
the  ChalJee. 

10.  Thus  were  the  visions  of  mi/  head 
ill  my  bed.  These  iue  the  things  which 
I  saw  upon  ray  bed.  AVhen  he  says  that 
they  were  the  'visions  of  his  head,' he 
states  a  doctrine  which  was  then  doubt- 
less regarded  as  the  truth,  that  the  head 
is  the  seat  of  thought.  *^  I  saw.  Marg., 
Was  seeing.  Chald.  '  seeing  I  saw.' 
The  phrase  would  imply  attentive  and 
calm  contemplation.  It  was  not  a  flitting 
vision  ;  it  was  an  object  which  he  con- 
templated deliberately  so  as  to  retain  a 
distinct  remembrance  of  its  form  and 
appearance.  ^  And  behold  a  tree  in  the 
midst  of  the  earth.  Occupj'ing  a  central 
position  on  the  earth»  It  seems  to  have 
been  by  itself — remote  from  any  forest : 
to  have  stood  alone.  Its  central  position, 
no  less  than  its  size  and  proportions, 
attracted  his  attention.  Such  a  tree, 
thus  towering  to  the  heavens,  and  send- 
ing out  its  branches  afar,  and  affording  a 
shade  to  the  beasts  of  the  field,  and  a 
home  to  the  fowls  of  heaven,  (ver.  12,) 
was  a  striking  emblem  of  a  great  and 
mighty  monarch,  and  it  undoubtedly 
occurred  to  Nebuchadnezzar  at  once  that 
the  vision  had  some  reference  to  himself. 
Thus  in  Ezek.  xxxi.  3,  the  Assyrian  king 
is  compared  with  a  magnificent  cedar: 
"  Behold,  the  Assyrian  was  a  cedar  in 
Lebanon,  with  fair  branches,  and  with  a 
shadowing  shroud,  and  of  an  high  stature. 
and  his  top  was  among  the  thick  boughs." 
Corap.  also  Ezek.  xvii.  22 — 24,  where  "  the 
high  tree  and  the  green  tree"  refer  proba- 
bly to  Nebuchadnezzar.  See  Notes  on 
Isa.  ii.  \?>.  Comp.  Isa.  s.  18, 19  ;  Jer.  xxii. 
7,  23.  Homer  often  compares  his  heroes 
to  trees.  Hector,  felled  by  a  stone,  is 
compared  with  an  oak  overthrown  by  a 
thunderbolt.  The  fall  of  Simoisius  is 
compared  by  him  to  that  of  a  poplar, 
ana  that  of  Euphorbus  to  the  fall  of  a 
beautiful  olive.  Nothing  is  more  obvious 
than  the  comparison  of  a  hero  with  a 
lofty  tree  of  the  forest,  and  hence  it  was 
natural  for  Nebuchadnezzar  to    suppose 


that  this  vision  had  a  reference  to  him- 
self, ^yliif^  the  heirjht  thereof  vras  great. 
In  the  next  verse  it  is  said  to  have  reached 
to  heaven. 

11.  The  tree  grew.  Or  the  tree  was 
great — na">.  It  does  not  mean  that  tho 
tree  grew  while  he  was  looking  at  it  so  as 
to  reach  to  the  heaven,  but  that  it  stooci 
before  him  in  all  its  glory,  its  top  reach- 
ing to  the  skj",  and  its  branches  extend- 
ing afar.  ^  And  was  strong.  It  was 
well  proportioned,  with  a  trunk  adapted 
to  its  height,  and  to  the  mass  of  boughs 
and  foliage  which  it  bore.  The  strength 
here  refers  to  its  trunk,  and  to  the  fact 
that  it  seemed  fixed  firmly  in  the  earth. 
*^  And  the  height  thereof  reached  unto  hea- 

I  ven.  To  the  sky ;  to  the  region  of  the 
clouds.  The  comparison  of  trees  reach- 
ing to  heaven,  is  common  in  Greek  and 
Latin  authors.  Grotius.  Comp.  Virgil's 
description  of  Fame. 

Mox  sese  attoUit  in  auras, 
Ingreditur  solo,  et  caput  inter  nubila  condit. 
^n.  iv.  176. 

^  And  the  sight  thereof  to  the  end  of  all 
the  earth.  It  could  be  seen,  or  was  visi- 
ble in  all  parts  of  the  earth.  The  Greek 
here  for  sight  is  Kiro;,  breadth,  capacious- 
ness. Herodotus  {Polymnia)  describes  a 
vision  remarkably  similar  to  this,  as  in- 
dicative of  a  wide  and  universal  mon- 
archy, respecting  Xerxes  :  "  After  these 
things  there  was  a  third  vision  in  his 
sleep,  which  the  magicians — ytayoi — hear- 
ing of,  said  that  it  pertained  to  all  the 
earth,  and  denoted  that  all  men  would  be 
subject  to  him.  The  vision  was  this : 
Xerxes  seemed  to  be  crowned  with  a 
branch  of  laurel,  and  the  branches  of 
laurel  seemed  to  extend  through  all  the 
earth."  The  vision  which  Nebuchadnez- 
zar had  here  of  a  tree  so  conspicuous  as 
to  be  seen  from  any  part  of  the  world, 
was  one  that  would  be  naturally  applied 
to  a  sovereign  having  a  universal  sway. 

12.  The  leaves  thereof  ■were  fair.  Were 
beautiful.     That  is,  they  were  abundant. 


212 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  570 


was  moat  for  all :  the  beasts  » of  the  j  13  I  saw  in  the  Tisions  of  my  head 
field  had  t  shadow  under  it,  and  the  upon  my  bed,  and,  behold,  a 'watcher 
fowls  of  the^Iieaven  dwelt  in  the  and  a  ^lioly  one  came  down  from 
boughs  thereof,  and  all  flesh  Avasfed  heaven. 
of  it. 


*-'  La.  4.  20. 


and  green,  and  there  were  no  signs  of 
dec.ny.  Every  thiuf;  indicated  a  vigorous 
and  healthy  growth — a  tree  in  its  full 
beauty  and  majesty — a  striking  emblem 
of  a  monarch  in  his  glory.  *j^A)id  the 
/rait  thereof  much.  It  was  loaded  with 
fruit — showing  that  the  tree  was  in  its 
full  vigour.  •[  And  in  it  was  meat  for  all. 
Food  for  all — for  so  the  word  meat  was 
formerly  used.  This  would  indicate  the 
dependence  of  the  multitudes  on  him 
whom  the  tree  represented,  .and  would 
also  denote  that  he  was  a  liberal  dis- 
penser of  his  favours.  <[  The  beasts  of  the 
field  had  shadow  nnder  it.  Found  a 
grateful  shade  und-er  it  in  the  burning 
heat  of  noon — a  striking  emblem  of  the 
blessings  of  a  monarchy  affording  protec- 
tion, and  giving  peace  to  all  under  it. 
*^  And  the  folds  of  the  heaven  dwelt  in  the 
Iniirjhs  thereof.  The  fowls  of  the  air. 
They  built  their  nests  and  reared  their 
young  there  undisturbed — another  strik- 
ing emblem  of  the  protection  afforded 
under  the  great  monarchy  designed  to  be 
represented.  ^  And  all  flesh  v:as  fed  of 
it.  All  animals ;  all  that  lived.  It  fur- 
nished protection,  a  home,  and  food  for 
all.  Bertholdt  renders  this  ".ill  men." 
In  the  Greek  Codex  (Chisian.)  there  is  the 
following  version  or  paraphrase  given  of 
this  passage:  'Its  vision  was  great,  its 
top  reached  to  the  heaven,  and  its  breadth 
— KVTOi — to  the  clouds — they  filled  the 
things — Tu — under  the  heaven — there  was 
a  sun  and  moon,  they  dwelt  in  it,  and 
enlightened  all  the  earth.' 

13.  /  saw  in  the  visions  of  my  head  upon 
my  bed.  In  the  visions  that  passed  before 
me  as  I  lay  upon  my  bed.  ver.  10.  %  And 
behold  a  watcher  and  a  hidy  one.  Or  ra- 
ther, perhaps, 'even  a  holy  one,' or, 'who 
was  a  holy  one.'  He  evidently  does  not 
intend  to  refer  to  t^-o  beings — a  '  watcher,' 
and,  '  one  who  was  holy,'  hut  he  means  to 
designate  the  character  of  the  watclier, 
ihat  he  was  holy,  or  that  he  was  one  of 
'he  class  of  '  watchers'  who  were  ranked 
is  holy — as  if  there  were  others  to  whom 
Uie    name  'watcher'   might  be  applied 


<^Ter.  17.  23.      '•  Matt.  25. 31.    Ke.U.lO. 


who  were  not  holy.     So  Bertholdt,  'not 
two,   but    only   one,   who    was    both    a 
watcher,    and    was   holy;    one   of    those 
known  as  watchers   and   as    holy   ones.' 
The  copulative  (i)  and  may  be  so  used  as 
to  denote  not  an  additional  one  or  thing, 
but  to  specify  something  in   addition  to, 
or  in  explanation  of,  what  the  name  ap- 
plied   would    indicate.      Comp.    1     Sam. 
xxviii.   3  ;    "  In    Ramah,  eren  (■{)    in   his 
own   city."     1  Sam.  xvii.  40  :  "  And  put 
them  in  a  shepherd's  bag  which  he  had, 
eren  (•))  in  a  scrip."    Comp.  Ps.  Ixviii.  ID; 
Amos  iii.  11,  iv.  10;  Jer.  xv.  13;  Isa.  ii. 
13,  14;  Ivii.  11;  Ecc.  viii.  2.     Gesenius, 
Lex.     The  word  rendered  watcher — iij 
— is  rendered  in   the  Vulgate,  vif/il;  in 
the  Greek  of  Theodotion  the  word   is  re- 
tained without  an  attempt  to  translate  it 
— tip;  the    Code.x  Chisianus  has  ayycXo; 
— '  an  angel  was  sent  in  his  strength  from 
heaven.'        The    original    word  —  -\>\;  — 
means  properly  n  watcher,  from  -\yj,  to  bo 
hot  and  ardent;  then  to  be  lively,  or  ac- 
tive, and  then   to  awake,  to  be  awake,  to 
be   awake   at   night,    to   watch.      Comp. 
Cant.  v.  2  ;  Mai.  ii.  12.     The  word  used 
here    is    employed   to   denote    one    who 
watches,  only  in  this  chapter  of  Daniel,  vs. 
13,  17,  23.     It  is  in  these  places  evidently 
applied  to  the  angels,  but  irhy  this  term 
is    used  is   unknown.      Gesenius    (Zex.) 
supposes  that  it  is  given  to  them  as  watch- 
ing over  the  souls  of  men.     Jerome  (in 
luc.)  says  that  the  reason  whj'  the  name 
is  given,  is,  because  they  always  watch, 
and  are  prepared  to  do  the  will  of  God. 
According   to   Jerome,  the   Greek   'ipto — 
Iris — as    applied    to    the    rainbow,    and 
which  seems  to  be  a  heavenly  being  sent 
down  to  the  earth,  is  derived   from  this 
word.     Comp.  the  Iliad,  ii.  27.     Theodo- 
ret    says  that   the   name   is   given  to  an 
angel,  to  denote  that  the  angel  is  without 
a  bud}' — aaMftarui — 'for  hc  that  is  encom- 
passed with   a    body   is    the    seivaut    of 
sleep,  but  he  that  is  free  from  a  body  is 
superior  to  the  necessity  of  sleep.'     Tha 
term  watchers,  as  applied  to  the  celestia' 


B.  C.  570.] 


CHAPTER    IV 


213 


14  lie  cried  •''  aloud,  and  said  thus,  |  away  from  under  it,  and  the  fowls 
Hew  ^  down  the  tree,  and  cut  off  liis  |  from  his  branches : 
branches,   shake  oif  his  leaves,  and  j      15  Nevertheless,  leave  the  «  stump 
Licatter  his  fruit:  let  the  beasts  get  of  his  roots  in  the  earth,  even  with 
a  with  miglit,  c.  3. 4.    ^  Mat.  3. 10.    Lu.  13. 7.  c  Job  14.  7—9, 


beings,  is  of  Eastern  origin,  and  not 
iui[)robably  wns  derived  from  Persia. 
"The  seven  Amliaspands  received  their 
flame  on  account  of  their  great,  holy 
/yes,  and  so,  general!}-,  all  the  heavenly 
[zeds  watch  in  the  high  lieaven  over! 
the  world,  and  the  souls  of  men,  and  \ 
on  this  account  are  called  the  watcliers  ! 
of  the  world."  Zeudnvesta.  as  quoted  by 
Lertholdt,  in  loc.  "  The  Bun-Dehesh,  a 
commentary  on  the  Zendavesta,  contains 
an  extract  from  it,  which  shows  clearly 
the  name  and  oliject  of  the  icutchcrs  in  ! 
the  ancient  system  of  Zoroaster.  It  runs 
thus  :  '  Ormuzd  has  set  four  watchers  in 
the  four  parts  of  the  heavens,  to  keep 
their  eye  upon  the  host  of  the  stars. 
They  are  bound  to  keep  watch  over  the 
hosts  of  the  celestial  stars.  One  stands 
here,  as  the  watcher  of  his  circle;  the 
other  there,  lie  has  placed  them  at  such 
and  such  posts,  as  watchers  over  such  and 
such  a  circle  of  the  heavenly  regions; 
and  this  by  his  own  power  and  might. 
Tashter  guards  the  east,  Satevis  watches 
the  west,  Venantthe  south,  and  Ilaftorang 
the  north.' "  Rhode,  Die  heilige  Sage 
des  Zendvolks,  p.  2C7,  as  quoted  by  Prof. 
Stuart,  in  luc.  "  The  epithet  r/ood  is  pro- 
bably added  here  to  distinguish  this  class 
of  watchers  from  tlie  bad  ones  ;  for  Ahri- 
man,  the  evil  genius,  had  ArcJtdcics  and 
Dens,  who  corresponded  in  rank  with  the 
Amhnspands  and  Izeds  of  the  Zendavesta, 
and  who  watched  to  do  evil  as  anxiously 
as  the  others  did  to  do  good."  Ptof. 
Stuart.  It  is  not  improbable  that  these 
terms,  as  applicable  to  celestial  beings, 
would  be  known  in  the  kingdom  of  Ba- 
bylon, and  nothing  is  more  natural  than 
that  it  should  be  so  used  in  this  book. 
It  is  not  found  in  any  of  the  books  of 
pure  Hebrew. 

14.  He  cried  aloud.  Marg.,  as  in  the 
Chaldee,  with  might.  That  is,  he  cried 
with  a  strong  voice.  ^^  Hew  down  the  tree. 
This  command  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  addressed  to  any  particular  ones 
■who  were  to  execute  the  commission,  but 
it  is  a  strong  and  significant  way  of  say- 
ing that  it  would  certainly  be  done.     Or 


possiiily  the  command  may  be  understood 
as  addressed  to  his  fellow-watchers  (ver. 
17),  or  to  orders  of  angels  over  whom 
this  one  presided.  ^  And  cut  off  his 
branches,  <tc.  The  idea  here,  and  in  the 
subsequent  part  of  the  verse,  is,  that  the 
tree  was  to  be  utterly  cut  up,  and  all  its 
glory  and  beauty  destroyed.  It  was  first 
to  be  felled,  and  then  its  limbs  chopped 
off,  and  then  these  were  to  be  stripped  of 
their  foliage,  and  then  the  fruit  which  it 
bore  was  to  be  scattered.  All  this  was 
strikingly  significant,  as  applied  to  the 
monarch,  of  some  awful  calamity  that  was 
to  occur  to  him  after  he  should  have  been 
brought  down  from  his  throne.  A  process 
of  humiliation  and  desolation  was  to  con- 
tinue, as  if  the  tree  when  cut  down  were 
not  suffered  to  lie  quietly  in  its  grandeur 
upon  the  earth.  *i  I^et  the  beasts  get 
awoi/,  &c.  That  is,  it  shall  cease  to  afford  a 
shade  to  the  beasts  and  a  home  to  the  fowls. 
The  purposes  which  it  had  answered  in 
the  days  of  its  glory  will  come  to  an  end. 
15.  Nevertheless,  leave  the  stum]}  of  hia 
roots  in  the  earth.  As  of  a  tree  that  is 
not  wholly  dead,  but  which  may  send  up 
suckers  and  shoots  again.  See  Notes  on 
Isa.  xi.  1.  In  Theodotion  this  is,  riiv 
(/luiji'  T(oj'  inrioi' — the  nature,  germ.  Schleus- 
ner  renders  the  Greek,  'the  truni;  o(  its 
roots.'  The  Vulgate  is,  germen  radicum 
ejus,  'the  germ  of  his  roots.'  The  Codex 
Chis.  has  piCav  jiiav  UKptTt  aVToH  h  t'i  yn: 
'leave  one  of  his  roots  in  the  earth.'  The 
original  Chaldee  word — 1|?^  — means  a 
stump,  trunk  (Gesenius) ;  the  Hebrew 
—  TJ?.  —  '^^  same  word  with  different 
pointing,  means  a  shrub,  or  shoot.  It 
occurs  only  once  in  Hebrew,  (Lev.  xxv. 
47,)  where  it  is  applied  to  the  stock  of  a 
family,  or  to  a  person  sprung  from  a  for- 
eign family  resident  in  the  Hebrew  ter- 
ritory :  "the  stock  of  the  stranger's 
family."  The  Chaldee  form  of  the  word 
occurs  only  in  Dan.  iv.  15,  23,  26,  ren- 
dered in  each  place  stuinj},  yet  not  mean- 
ing stump  in  the  sense  in  which  that 
word  is  now  commonly  employed.  Tho 
word   stump  now   means    the   stub  of  a 


214 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  570 


a  band  of  iron  and  brass,  in  the  ten- 
der grass  of  the  field  ;  and  let  it  be 
■wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven,  and  let 

tree;  the  part  of  the  tree  remaining 
in  tne  earth,  or  projecting  above  it, 
after  the  tree  is  cut  down,  without  any 
reference  to  the  question  whether  it  be 
alive  or  dead.  The  word  here  used  im- 
plies that  it  was  still  alive,  or  that  there 
was  a  germ  which  would  send  up  a  new 
shoot  so  that  the  tree  would  live  again. 
The  idea  is,  that  though  the  mighty  tree 
would  fall,  yet  there  would  remain  vitality 
in  the  root,  or  the  portion  that  would  re- 
main in  tlie  earth  after  the  tree  was  cut 
down,  and  that  this  would  spring  up  again 
— a  most  striking  image  of  what  would 
occur  to  Nebuchadnezzar  after  he  should 
bo  cast  down  from  his  lofty  throne,  and 
be  again  restored  to  his  reason  and  to 
power.  ^  Even  with  a  hand  of  iron  and 
brass.  This  expression  may  be  regarded 
as  applicable  either  to  the  cut-down  tree, 
or  to  the  humbled  monarch.  If  applied 
to  the  former,  it  would  seem  that  the  idea 
is,  that  the  stump  or  root  of  a  tree,  deemed 
so  valuable,  would  be  carefully  secured 
by  an  enclosure  of  iron  or  brass,  cither 
in  the  form  of  a  hoop  placed  round  the 
top  of  the  stump,  to  preserve  it  from  be- 
ing opened  or  cracked  by  the  heat  of  the 
sun,  so  as  to  admit  moisture,  which  would 
rot  it;  or  around  the  roots,  to  bind  it  to- 
gether, with  the  hope  that  it  would  grow 
again ;  or  it  may  refer  to  a  railing  or  en- 
closure of  iron  or  brass,  to  keep  it  from 
being  ploughed  or  dug  up  as.  worth- 
less. In  either  ease,  it  would  be  guarded 
with  the  hope  that  a  tree  so  valuable 
might  spring  up  again.  If  applied  to  the 
monarch — an  explanation  not  inconsistent 
with  the  proper  interpretation  of  the  pas- 
sage— it  would  seem  to  refer  to  some  me- 
thod of  securing  the  royal  maniac  in  bonds 
of  iron  and  brass,  as  with  the  hope  that  his 
reason  might  still  be  restored,  or  with  a 
view  to  keeping  him  from  inflicting  fatal 
injury  on  himself.  That  the  thing  here  re- 
ferred to  might  be  practised  in  regard  to  a 
valuable  tree  cut  down,  or  broken  down,  is 
by  no  means  improbable ;  that  it  might  be 
practised  in  reference  to  the  monarch  is 
in  accordance  with  the  manner  in  which 
the  insane  have  been  treated  in  all  ages 
and  countries.  ^  In  the  tender  grass  of 
the  Jield.  Out  of  doors  ;  under  no  shelter; 
exposed  to  dews  and  rains.    The  stump 


his  portion  be  with  the  beasts  in  the 
grass  of  the  earth ; 


would  remain  in  Uie  open  field  where  the 
grass  grew,  until  it  should  shoot  up  again  ; 
and  in  a  condition  strongly  resembling 
that,  the  monarch  would  be  excluded 
from  his  palace  and  from  the  abodes  oi 
men.  For  the  meaning  of  this,  as  ap- 
plied to  Nebuchadnezzar,  see  Notes  on 
ver.  25.  The  word  which  is  rendered 
tender  f/rass,  means  simply  young  grass 
or  herbage.  No  emphasis  should  be  put 
on  the  word  tender.  It  .dimply  means 
that  he  would  be  abroad,  where  the  grass 
springs  up  and  grows.  ^  A)id  let  it  he 
icet  tcith  the  dew  of  heaven.  As  applied 
to  the  tree,  meaning  that  the  dew  would 
fall  on  it  and  continually  moisten  it.  The 
falling  of  the  dew  upon  it  would  contri- 
bute to  preserve  it  alive  and  secure  its 
growth  again.  In  a  drj-  soil,  or  if  there 
were  no  rain  or  dew,  the  germ  would  die. 
It  cannot  be  supposed  that  in  regard  to 
the  monarch  it  could  be  meant  that  his 
remaining  under  the  dew  of  heaven  would 
in  any  way  contribute  to  restore  his  rea- 
son, but  all  that  is  implied  in  regard  to 
him  is  the  fact  that  he  would  thus  be  an 
outcast.  The  word  rendered  'let  it  be 
wet' — J.'?vi"'.  from  j:3X  —  means  to  dip  in; 
to  immerse;  to  tinge  ;  to  dye  ;  though  the 
word  is  not  found  in  the  latter  senses  in 
the  Chaldee.  In  the  Targuns  it  is  often 
used  for  '  to  dye,  to  colour.'  The  word 
occurs  only  in  this  chapter  of  Daniel  (v.«. 
15,  25,  33),  and  is  in  each  place  rendered 
in  the  same  way.  It  is  not  used  in  the 
Hebrew  scripture  in  the  sense  of  to  dye 
or  tinge,  except  in  the  form  of  a  noun 
—  j'as  —  in  Judges  v.  20:  "to  Sisera  a 
prey  of  divers  colors,  a  prey  of  divers  co- 
lors of  needle-work,  of  divers  colors  of 
needle-work."  In  the  passage  before 
us,  of  course,  there  is  no  allusion  of  this 
kind,  but  the  word  means  merely  that  the 
stump  of  the  tree  would  be  kept  moist 
with  the  dew  ;  as  applicable  to  the  tree 
that  it  might  be  more  likely  to  sprout  up 
again.  ^  And  let  his  portion  be  with  the 
beasts  in  the  grc(ss  of  the  earth.  Here  is 
a  change  evidently  from  the  tree  to  some- 
thing represented  by  the  tree.  We  could 
not  say  of  a  tree  that  its  'portion  was 
with  the  beasts  in  the  grass,'  though  in 
the  confused  and  incongruous  images  of  a 


B.  C.  570.] 


CHAPTER   IV, 


215 


16  Let  his  heart  be  changed 
•from  man's,  and  let  a  beast's  heart 

»Is.  6. 10.  be.  12. 7. 

dream,  nothing  would  be  more  natural 
thnn  such  a  change  from  a  tree  to  some 
object  represented  b_y  it,  or  having  some 
resemblance  to  it.  It  is  probable  that  it 
was  this  circumstance  that  particularly 
attracted  the  attention  of  the  monarch  ; 
for  though  the  dream  began  with  a  tree, 
it  ended  with  reference  to  a  2'>c>'son,  and 
evidently  some  one  whose  station  would 
be  well  represented  by  such  a  magnificent 
and  solitary  tree.  The  sense  here  is,  'let 
him  share  the  lot  of  beasts;  let  him  live 
as  they  do ;'  that  is,  let  him  live  on  grass. 
Comp.  ver.  25. 

16.  Let  his  heart  be  changed  from  man's, 
and  let  a  beast's  heart  be  given  unto  him. 
Here  the  same  thing  occurs  in  a  more 
marked  form,  showing  that  some  man 
was  represented  by  the  vision,  and  indi- 
cating some  change  which  was  fitted  to 
attract  the  deepest  attention — as  if  the 
person  referred  to  should  cease  to  be 
a  man,  and  become  a  beast.  The  word 
heai-t  here  seems  to  refer  to  nature — '  let 
his  nature  or  propensity  cease  to  be  that 
of  a  man,  and  become  like  that  of  a  beast ; 
let  him  cease  to  act  as  a  man,  and  act  as 
the  beasts  do — evincing  as  little  mind, 
and  living  in  the  same  manner.'  •[  And 
let  seven  times  pass  over  him.  In  this 
condition,  or  until  be  is  res-tored.  It  is 
not  indeed  sairf  that  he  would  be  restored, 
but  this  is  implied  (ff)  in  the  very  expres- 
sion 'until  seven  times  shall  pass  over 
him,'  as  if  he  would  then  be  restored  in 
some  way,  or  as  if  this  condition  would 
then  terminate;  and  (6)  in  the  state- 
ment that  '  the  stump  of  the  roots'  would 
be  left  up  in  the  earth  as  if  it  might  still 
germinate  again.  Everything,  however, 
in  the  dream  was  fitted  to  produce  per- 
plexity as  to  what  it  could  mean.  The 
word  rendered  times — jij";]; — sing,  yry^ 
is  an  important  word  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  Daniel.  It  is  of  the  same  class 
of  words  as  the  Hebrew  -\';_),  to  point  out, 
to  Appoint,  to  fix  ;  and  would  refer  pro- 
perly to  time  considered  as  a^^pointed  or 
designated  ;  then  it  may  mean  any  stated 
or  designated  period,  as  a  year.  The 
idea  is  that  of  time  considered  as  desig- 
nated or  fixed  by  periods,  and  the  word 
may  refer  to  any  such  period,  how- 
ever   long    or    short — a  day,   a  month, 


be  given  unto  him  ;  and  let  seven 
times  b  pass  over  him. 

17  This  matter  is  by  the  decreo 


a  year,  or  any  other  measure  of  duration. 
What  measurement  or  portion  is  in- 
tended in  any  particular  case,  must  be 
determined  from  the  connection  in  which 
the  word  is  found.  The  word  used  here 
does  not  occur  in  the  Hebrew  scripture, 
and  is  found  only  in  the  book  of  Daniel, 
where  it  is  uniformly  rendered  time  and 
times.  It  is  found  only  in  the  following 
places,  Dan.  ii.  8,  "that  ye  would  gain 
^the  time;"  ii.  9,  "till  the  time  be 
1  changed  ;"  ii.  21,  "and  he  changeth  the 
I  times;"  iii.  5,  15,  "at  what  time  ye  shall 
hear;"  iv.  16,  23,  "and  let  seven  timet 
pass  over  him ;"  25,  32,  "  seven  times 
I  shall  pass  over  him  ;"  vii.  12,  "  for  a  sea- 
son and  time;"  vii.  2S,  "until  a  time^ 
and  times,  and  the  dividing  oi  time."  In 
the  place  before  us,  so  far  as  the  meaning 
of  the  word  is  concerned,  it  might  mean 
a  day,  a  week,  a  month,  or  a  year.  The 
more  common  interpretation  is  that  which 
supposes  that  it  was  a  year,  and  this  will 
agree  better  with  all  the  circumstances  of 
the  case  than  .any  other  period.  The 
Greek  of  Theodotion  here  is,  Kal  'otto. 
xaipoi  dWayfiaovrai  £t'  durdi/ — 'And  seven 
times  shall  change  upon  him;'  that  is, 
until  seven  seasons  revolve  over  him. 
The  most  natural  construction  of  this 
Greek  phrase  would  be  to  refer  it  to 
years.  The  Latin  Vulgate  interprets  it 
in  .a  similar  way — et  septem  tempora 
mutentur  super  eum — 'And  let  seven 
times  be  changed' or  revolve  'over  him.' 
In  the  Cod.  Chis.  it  is,  xal  crrrd  iVrj  i3ooKriS~i, 
aiv  airoii — 'and  let  him  feed  with  them 
seven  years.'  Luther  renders  it  times. 
Josephus  understands  by  it  '  seven  years.' 
Ant.  B.  X.  ch.  X.  §  6.  While  the  Chal- 
dee  word  is  indeterminate  in  respect  to 
the  length  of  time,  the  most  natural  and 
obvious  construction  here  and  elsewhere, 
in  the  use  of  the  word,  is  to  refer  it 
to  years.  Days  or  weeks  wouid  be 
obviously  too  short,  and  though  in  this 
place  the  word  months  would  perhaps  em- 
brace all  that  would  be  necessary,  yet  in 
the  other  places  where  the  word  occurs 
in  Daniel,  it  undoubtedly  refers  to  years, 
and  there  is,  therefore,  a  propriety  in 
understanding  it  in  the  same  manner  here. 
17.  This  matter  is  by  the  decree  of  th« 
toatchers.     Notes  on  ver.  13.    They  are 


216 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  570. 


-of  the  watchers,  and  the  demand  kingdom  of  men,  and  giveth  it  to 
by  the  -word  of  the  holy  ones:  to :  whomsoever   ^he   will,    and   setteth 
the  intent  that  the  living  may  ^  know  up  over  it  the  basest  e  of  men. 
that  the  Most  High  <^  ruleth  in  the 


»  ver.  13,  U.     h  Vs.  9.  IG,  20.      c  Tcr.  25,  32, 35. 


(IPs.  75.  6,7.  =  Ex.  9.16.    lKi.21.  23 

2  Ki.  21.  6,  &c.    2  Ch.  28.  22. 


described  here  not  only  as  watching  over 
the  affairs  of  men,  but  as  entrusted  with 
the  execution  of  high  and  important  de- 
iigns    of    God.      The   representation    is, 
that    one    of  these  heavenly  beings  was 
seen   by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  his  visions, 
and  that  this  one  stated  to  him  that  he 
had  come   to  execute  what  had  been  de- 
termined on  by  his  associates,  or  in  coun- 
sel with  others.     The  idea  would  seem  to 
be,  that   the  atTairs    of  the  kingdom  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  had   been  in  important 
respects  placed  under  the  administration 
of  these  beings,  and  that  in  solemn  coun- 
cil  they  had  resolved  on    this  measure. 
It  is  not  said  that  this  was  not  in  accord- 
ance with,  and  under  the  direction  of,  a 
higher  power — that  of  God  ;   and  that  is 
rather  implied  when  it  is   said  that  the 
great  design   of  this  was  to   show  to  the 
living  that  '  the  Most  Hi(jh  ruleth  in  the 
kingdom  of  men.'     In  itself  considered, 
there   is   no  improbability  in    supposing 
that  the  affiiirs  of  this  lower  world,  are  in 
some  respects  placed  under  the  adminis- 
tration of  beings  superior  to  man,  nor  that 
events  may  occur  as  the  result  of  their 
deliberation,  or,  as  it   is  here  expressed,  j 
by  their  'decree.'     If,  in  .any  respect,  the  [ 
affairs   of  the  world  are   subject  to   thjir 
jurisdiction,  there  is  every  reason  to  sup- 
pose   that   there  would   bo  harmony   of  i 
counsel  and  of  action,  .and  .an  event  of  j 
this  kind  might  be  so  represented.    •[  And  \ 
the  demand.     Or,  the  matter;  the  affair; 
the  business.     The  Chaldee  word  properly 
means  a  question,  a  petition  ;  then  a  sub-  ,' 
jeet   of  inquiry,    a   matter   of  business. ' 
Here  it  means,  that  this  matter,  or  this 
business,  was    in    accordance    with    the 
direction  of  the  holy  ones.     ^  The  hohj 
ones.      Synonymous   with    the   watchers, 
and  referring  to  the  same.     See  Notes  on 
ver.  13.     ^  To  the  intent  that  the  living  matj 
know.     "With  the  design  that  those  who 
live   on   the  earth   may  understand  this. 
That  is,  the  design  was  to  furnish  a  proof 
of  this,  so  impressive  and  striking,  that  it 
could  not  be  doubted  by  any.     No  more 
effectual  way  of  doing  this  could  occur 
than  by  showing  the  absolute  power  of 


the   Most  High  over  such  a  monarch  as 
Nebuchadnezzar.     ^  That  the  3/ost  High. 
He   who   is  exalted   .above    all    men ;  all 
angels;  all  that  pretend  to  be  gods.     The 
phr.ase  here  is  designed  to  refer  to  the  true 
God,  and  the  object  was  to  show  that  ho 
was   the  most  exalted  of  .all  beings,  .and 
had  absolute  control  over  all.     ^i  Buleth 
in  the  kingdom  of  men.     Whoever  rein-ns 
he  reigns   over  them.     ^  And  giveth  It  to 
u-hoinsoever  he   will.     That    is,    he  gives 
dominion    over   men    to  whomsoever  ho 
chooses.     It   is  not  by  human  ordering, 
or  by  arrangements  among  men.     It  ?s 
not  by  hereditary   right;  not   by   a  suc- 
cession; not  by  conquest;  not  by  usur 
pation  ;  not  by  election,  that  this  matter 
is  finally  determined  ;  it  is  by  the  decree 
.and  purpose  of  God.     Ho  can  remove  the 
hereditary  prince  by  de.ath  ;  he  can  cause 
him   to  be  set  aside  by  granting  success 
to  a  usurper ;  he  can  dispose  of  a  crown 
by    conquest ;    he   can    cut  off  the   con- 
I  queror  by  death,  and   transfer  the  crown 
to  an  inferior  officer ;  he  can  remove  one 
who  was  the  united  choice  of  a  people  by 
death,  and  put  .another  in  his  place.     So 
;the    apostle    Paul    says,   "There   is   no 
I  power  but  of  God  :  the  powers  that  be  .are 
ord.ained  of   God."  Rom.  xiii.  1.     ^  And 
setteth  up  over  it  the  basest  of  men.   '  That 
^  is,  he  appoints  over  the  kingdom  of  men, 
j  at   his   pleasure,   those   who   are  of  the 
;  humblest  or  lowest  rank.     The  .allusion 
I  here  is  not  to  Nebuchadnezzar  as  if  he 
were  the  basest,  or  the  vilest  of  men,  but 
the  statement  is  a  general  truth,  that  God, 
j  at  his  pleasure,  sets  aside  those  of  exalted 
rank,   and  elevates  those  of  the   lowest 
rank   in  their  place.     There  is  an    idea 
now   attached    commonly   to    the    word 
basest,  which  the  word  used  here  by  no 
means  conveys.     It  does  not  denote  the 
mean,  the  vile,  the  worthless,  the  illiberal, 
but  those  of  humble  or  lowly  rank.     This 
is   the   proper   meaning  of  the   Chaldee 
word — S^-f,  and  so  it  is  rendered  in  the 
Vulgate — hnmillimitm     hominem.        The 
Greek  of  Theodotion,  however,  is,  '  that 
which   is  dieesteemed   among   men' — ijo«. 
iivufia  dv^pxijTuy.     In  the  latter  paxt  of  the 


JB  C.  570.J 


CHAPTER   IV. 


21T 


18  This  dream  I  king  Nebuchad- 
nezzar have  seen.  Now  thou,  0 
Belteshazzar,  dechire  the  interpre- 
tation thereof,  forasmuch  »  as  all  the 
viha  men  of  my  kingdom  are  not 
able  to  make  known  unto  me  the  in- 
terpretation :  but  thou  ari  able;  for 
the  f.pirit  of  the  holy  gods  is  in  thee. 

I'J  '[  Then  Daniel,  whose  name 
^  vor.  8. 

dream  (vs.  15,  16),  we  have  an  illustra- 
tion of  what  often  occurs  in  dreams — 
tlioir  singular  incongruity.  In  the  early- 
part  of  the  dream,  the  vision  is  that 
of  a  tree,  and  the  idea  is  consistently  car- 
ried out  for  a  considerable  part  of  it — 
the  height  of  the  tree,  the  branches,  the 
leaves,  the  fruit,  the  shade,  the  stump; 
then  suddenly  there  is  a  chanye  to  some- 
thing that  is  living  and  human — the 
change  of  the  heart  to  that  of  a  beast; 
the  being  exposed  to  the  dew  of  heaven  ; 
the  portion  with  the  beasts  of  the  earth,  &c. 
Such  changes  and  incongruities,  as  every 
one  knows,  are  common  in  dreams.  So 
Shakespeare  : 

True,  I  talk  of  dreams, 
Which  are  the  chililren  of  an  iJle  brain, 
Begot  of  nothing  but  vain  fanta=y  ; 
Which  13  as  thiu  of  substance  as  the  air. 
And  more  inconstant  tlian  the  wiud,  wlio  woos 
Even  now  the  frozen  bosom  of  the  North, 
And,  being  angered,  puifs  away  from  them, 
Turning  his  face  to  the  dew-dropping  South. 
-  Romeo  a)id  Juliet. 

18.  This  dream  I  Jct'iig  Nebuchadnezzar 
have  seen.  This  is  the  dream  which  I 
saw.  lie  had  detailed  it  at  length  as  it 
appeared  to  him,  without  pretending  to  be 
ai)le  to  explain  it.  ^  Forasmuch  as  all  the 
trine  men  of  m>/  ktnr/dom,  &c.  ver.  7.  ^  But 
thou  art  able,  &c.     Notes  on  ver.  9. 

19.  Then  Daniel,  lohose  name  was  Bel- 
teshazzar. ver.  8.  It  has  been  objected 
that  the  mention  in  this  edict  of  both  the 
names  by  which  Daniel  was  known  is  an 
improbable  circumstance;  that  a  heathen 
monarch  would  only  have  referred  to  him 
by  the  name  by  which  he  was  known  in 
Babylon — the  name  which  ho  had  him- 
self conferred  on  him  in  honour  of  the 
god  {Betas),  afie!  vbom  he  was  called. 
Bne  Notes  on  ch.  i.  7.  To  this  it  may  be 
replied,  that  although  in  ordinary  inter- 
course with  him  in  Babylon  ;  in  address- 
ing? )iim  as  aii  officer  of  state  under  the 

19 


was  Belteshazzar,  was  ast)nied  for 
one  hour,  and  his  thoughts  troubled 
''him.  The  king  spake,  and  said, 
Belteshazzar,  let  not  the  dream,  or 
the  interpretation  thereof,  trouljlo 
tliee.  Belteshazzar  answered  and 
said.  My  lord,  the  dream  be  to  them 
c  that  hate  thee,  and  the  interpreta- 
tion tliereof  to  thine  enemies. 


■^  ver.  9. 


:2Sam.  18.  02;  Je.20.  7. 


Chaldean  government,  he  would  undoubt- 
edly be  mentioned  only  by  that  name,  yet 
in  a  proclamation  like  this  both  the  names 
by  which  he  was  known  would  be  used^ 
the  one  to  identify  him  among  his  own 
countrymen ;  the  other  among  the  Chal- 
deans. This  proclamation  was  designed 
for  people  of  all  classes,  and  ranks,  and 
tongues  (ver.  1.);  it  was  intended  to  make 
known  the  supremacy  of  the  God  wor- 
shipped by  the  Hebrews;  Nebuchadnez- 
zar had  derived  the  knowledge  of  the 
meaning  of  his  dream  from  one  who  was 
a  Hebrew,  and  it  was  natural,  therefore, 
in  order  that  it  might  be  known  by  whom 
the  dream  had  been  interpreted,  that  he 
should  so  designate  him  that  it  would  be 
understood  by  all.  ^  Was  astonicd.  Was 
astonished.  The  word  astonied,  now  gone 
out  of  use,  several  times  occurs  in  the 
common  version  :  Ezra  is.  3 ;  Job  xvii.  8, 
xviii.  20;  Ezek.  iv.  17  ;  Dan.  iii.  24,  iv.  19, 
V.  9.  T)i\n\e\v!a.s  amazed  Oi,nd  overwhelmed 
at  what  was  manifestly  the  fearful  import 
of  the  dream.  ^  For  one  hour.  It  is  not 
possible  to  designate  the  exact  time  de- 
noted by  the  word  hour  —  ^i'v'.  Accord- 
ing to  Gesenius  {Lex.),  it  means  a  moment 
of  time ;  properly,  a  look,  a  glance,  a 
wink  of  the  eye — Germ,  augenblick.  In 
Arabic,  the  word  means  both  a  moment 
and  an  hour.  In  Dan.  iii.  0,  15,  it  evi- 
dently means  immediately.  Here  it  would 
seem  to  mean  a  short  time.  That  is,  Dan- 
iel was  fixed  in  thought,  and  maintained 
a  profound  silence,  until  the  king  ad- 
dressed him.  We  are  not  to  suppose  that 
this  continued  during  the  space  of  time 
which  we  call  an  hour,  but  he  was  silent 
until  Nebuchadnezzar  addressed  him. 
He  would  not  seem  to  be  willing  even  tc 
speak  of  so  fearful  calamities  as  he  saw 
were  coming  upon  the  king.  ^[  And  hi* 
thoughts  troubled  him.  The  thoughts 
which  passed  through   his  mind  re^peet- 


218 


DANIEL. 


fB.  C.  570 


20  The  tree  »that  thou  sawest, 
which  grew,  and  was  strong,  whose 
height  reached  unto  the  heaven,  and 
ihe  sight  thereof  to  ail  tlie  earth  ; 

21  Whose  leaves  tvcre  fair,  and 
the  fruit  thereof  much,  and  in  it  icas 
meat  for  all ;  under  which  the  beasts 
of  the  field  dwelt,  and  upon  whose 

a  ver.  10—12.  ^c2.  38. 


ing  the  fearful  import  of  the  dream. 
^  The  ki)>r/  spake,  and  said,  &c.  Per- 
ceiving that  the  dream  had,  as  he  had  pro- 
bably apprehended,  a  fearful  signilicanc^', 
and  that  Daniel  hesitated  about  explain- 
ing its  u)eaning.  Perhaps  he  supposed 
that  he  hesitated  because  he  appre- 
hended danger  to  himself  if  he  should 
express  his  thoughts,  and  the  king,  there- 
fore, assured  him  of  safety,  and  encour- 
aged him  to  declare  the  full  meaning  of 
the  vision,  whatever  that  might  be. 
^  Belteshazzar  answered  and  said,  My 
lord,  the  dream  bo  to  them  that  hate  thee. 
Let  such  things  as  are  foreboded  by  the 
dream  happen  to  your  enemies  rather 
than  to  you.  This  merely  implies  that  he 
did  not  desire  that  these  things  should 
come  upon  him.  It  was  the  language  of 
courtesy  and  of  respect;  it  showed  that 
he  had  no  desire  that  any  calamity-  should 
befal  the  monarch,  and  that  he  had  no 
wish  for  the  success  of  his  enemies.  There 
is  not,  in  this,  anything  necessarily  im- 
plying a  hatred  of  the  enemies  of  the 
king,  or  anj'  wish  that  calamity  should 
come  upon  them;  it  is  the  expression  of 
an  earnest  desire  that  such  an  affliction 
might  not  come  upon  /(('»».  If  it  must 
come  on  anj',  such  was  his  respect  for  the 
sovereign,  and  such  his  desire  for  his 
welfare  and  prosperity,  that  he  preferred 
that  it  should  fall  upon  those  who  were 
his  enemies,  and  who  hated  him.  This 
language,  however,  should  not  be  rigidly 
interpreted.  It  is  the  language  of  an 
Oriental;  language  uttered  at  a  court 
where  only  the  words  of  respect  were 
heard.  Expressions  similar  to  this  occur 
not  unfrequently  in  ancient  writings. 
Thus  Horace,  B.  iii.  Ode  27  : 

Ilostium  uxores  puerique  cascos 
Sontiant  motus  oricntis  austri. 

And  Virgil,  Georg.  iii.  513. 

Di  mcliora  piis,  crroremque  hostibus  ilium. 
"Such     rhetorical     embellishmeuts    are 
pointed  at  no  individuals,  have  nothing 


branches  the  fowls  of  the  heayeo 
had  their  habitation  : 

22  It  is  bthou,  O  king,  that  art 
grown  and  become  strong:  for  thy 
greatness  is  grown,  and  reacheth 
unto  heaven,  and  thy  dominion  ■=  to 
the  end  of  the  earth. 

23  And  whereas  a  the  king  saw  a 

cJe.  27.  6— 8.  dyer.  13, 14. 

in  them  of  malice  or  iU-will,  are  used  as 
marks  of  respect  to  the  ruling  powers, 
and  maybe  presumed  to  be  free  from  any 
imputation  of  a  want  of  charity."  Win- 
kle, in  luc. 

20,  21.  The  tree  that  thou  sawcst,  &c. 
In  these  two  verses  Daniel  refers  to  the 
leading  circumstances  respecting  the  tree 
as  it  appeared  in  the  dream,  without  any 
allusion  as  yet  to  the  order  to  cut  it  down. 
He  probablj-  designed  to  show  that  he  had 
clearly  understood  what  had  been  said,  or 
that  he  had  attended  to  the  most  minute 
circumstances  as  n.arrated.  It  was  im- 
portant to  do  this  in  order  to  show  clearly 
that  it  referred  to  the  king  ;  a  fact  which 
probably  Nebuchadnezzar  himself  appre- 
hended, but  still  it  was  important  that 
this  should  be  so  firmly  fixed  in  his  mind 
that  he  would  not  revolt  from  it  when 
Daniel  came  to  disclose  the  fearful  import 
of  the  remainder  of  the  dream. 

22.  It  is  thou,  0  kinrf.  It  is  a  repre- 
sentation of  thj'self.  Comp.  eh.  ii.  38. 
<[  That  art  cjrown  and  hec-ome  strong.  Re- 
ferring to  the  limited  extent  of  his  domi- 
nion when  he  came  to  the  throne,  and  the 
increase  of  his  power  by  a  wise  adminis- 
tration and  by  conquest.  ^  For  thy  great- 
ness is  grown.  The  majesty  and  glorj'  of 
the  monarch  had  increased  by  all  liis  eon- 
quests,  and  by  the  magnificence  which  he 
had  thrown  around  his  court.  1[  And 
reacheth  unto  heaven.  An  expression 
merely  denoting  the  greatness  of  his  au- 
thority. The  tree  is  said  to  have  reached 
unto  heaven  (ver.  II),  and  the  stateliness 
and  grandeur  of  so  great  a  monarch  might 
be  represented  by  language  which  seemed 
to  imply  that  he  had  control  over  all 
things.  ^  And  thy  dominion  to  the  end  of 
the  earth.  To  the  extent  of  the  world  as 
then  known.  This  was  almost  literally 
true. 

23.  And  tohereas  tJie  Icing  saw  a  wateher. 
See  Notes  on  ver.  13.  The  recapitula- 
tion in  this  verse  is  slightly  varied  from 


B.  C.  570.1 


CHAPTER   IV. 


219 


•watcher  and  a  holy  one  coming  down'  the  beasts  of  the  field,  till  seven  ti.nes 


from  heaven,  and  sajMng,  IIcw  the 
tree  down,  and  destroy  it ;  yet  leave 
tlie  stump  of  the  roots  thereof  in  the 
?arth,  even  with  a  hand  of  iron  and 
brass,  in  the  tender  grass  of  the 
field  ;  and  let  it  be  wet  with  the  dew 
of  heaven,  and  let  his  portion  be  with 


the  statement  in  vs.  14 — 16,  still  so  as  not 
innterially  to  atfect  the  sense.  Daniel 
seems  to  have  designed  to  recall  the  prin- 
iipal  circumstances  in  the  dream,  so  as  to 
identify  it  in  the  king's  mind,  and  so  as 
to  prepare  him  for  the  statement  of  the 
fearful  events  which  were  to  happen  to 
him. 

24.  This  is  the  decree  of  the  Most  High. 
Daniel  here  designs  evidently  to  direct 
the  attention  of  the  monarch  to  the  one 
living  and  true  God,  and  to  show  him 
that  he  presides  over  all.  The  purpose 
of  the  vision  was,  in  a  most  impressive 
way,  to  convince  the  king  of  his  exist- 
ence and  sovereignty.  Hence,  Daniel 
says  that  all  this  was  in  accordance  with 
his  'decree.'  It  was  not  a  thing  of  chance  : 
it  was  not  ordered  by  idol  gods ;  it  was 
not  an  event  that  occurred  by  the  mere 
force  of  circumstances,  or  as  the  result  of 
the  operation  of  secondary  laws  ;  it  was 
a  direct  divine  interposition — the  solemn 
purpose  of  the  living  God  that  it  should 
be  so.  Nebuchadnezzar  had  represented 
this,  in  accordance  with  the  prevailing 
views  of  religion  in  his  land,  as  a  'decree 
of  the  Wateheis'  (ver.  17);  Daniel,  in  ac- 
cordance with  his  views  of  religion,  and 
with  truth,  represents  it  as  the  decree  of 
the  true  God.  ^  Which  is  come  upon  my 
lord  the  king.  The  decree  had  been  pre- 
viously formed;  its  execution  had  now 
come  upon  the  king. 

25.  Thei/  shall  drive  thee  from  men. 
That  is,  thou  shalt  be  driven  from  the 
habitations  of  men  ;  from  the  place  which 
thou  hast  occupied  among  men.  The 
prophet  does  not  say  teho  would  do  this, 
but  he  says  that  it  iDouid  be  done.  The 
language  is  such  as  would  be  used  of  one 
who  should  become  a  maniac,  and  be 
thrust  out  of  the  ordinary  society  in  which 
he  had  moved.  The  Greek  of  Theodo- 
tion  here  is,  naX  ai  cKifit^oncnf,  The  Co- 
des Chisian.  has,  '  And  the  Most  High 
and  his  angels  shall  run  upoi;    thee — 


pass  over  him  ; 

24  This  w  the  interpretation,  O 
king,  and  this  is  the  decree  of  the 
Most  High,  which  is  come  upon  my 
lord  the  king: 

25  That  they  shall  drive  »thee 
from  men,  and   thy  dwelling  shall 

»  ver.  33. 

KaTarpcxovmu — leading  thee  into  prison,' 
or  into  detention — eij  (puXaKijv — 'and  shall 
thrust  thee  into  a  desert  place.'  The 
general  sense  is,  that  he  would  be  in  such 
a  state  as  to  be  treated  like  a  beast  rather 
than  .a  man;  that  he  would  be  removed 
from  his  ordinary  abodes,  and  be  a  miser- 
able and  neglected  outcast.  This  com- 
mences the  account  of  the  calamity  that 
was  to  come  upon  Nebuchadnezzar,  and 
as  there  have  been  many  opinions  enter- 
tained as  to  the  nature  of  this  malady,  it 
may  be  proper  to  notice  some  of  them. 
Comp.  Bertholdt,  pp.  286-292.  Some  have 
held  that  there  was  a  real  metamorphosis 
into  some  form  of  an  animal,  though  his 
rational  soul  remained,  so  that  he  was  able 
to  acknowledge  God  and  give  praise  to 
him.  Cedrenus  held  that  he  was  trans- 
formed into  a  beast,  half  lion  and  half  ox. 
An  unknown  author,  mentioned  by  Justin, 
maintains  that  the  transformation  was 
into  an  animal  resembling  what  was  seen 
in  the  visions  of  Ezekiel — the  Cheru- 
bim— composed  of  an  eagle,  a  lion,  an  ox, 
and  a  man.  In  support  of  the  opinion 
that  there  was  a  real  transformation,  an 
appeal  has  been  made  to  the  common  be- 
lief among  ancient  nations,  that  such  me- 
tamorphoses had  acfually  occurred,  and 
especially  to  what  Herodotus  (iv.  105) 
says  of  the  Xeiiri  (Xsnpoi): — '-It  is  said 
by  the  Scythians,  as  well  as  by  the  Greeks 
who  dwell  in  Scythia,  that  once  in  every 
year  they  are  all  of  them  changed  into 
wolves,  and  that  after  remaining  in  that 
state  for  tlie  space  of  a  few  days,  they 
resume  their  former  shape."  Herodotus 
adds,  however,  "This  I  do  not  believe, 
although  they  swear  that  it  is  true."  An 
appeal  is  also  made  to  an  assertion  of 
Apuleius,  who  says  of  himself  that  he  wa? 
changed  into  an  ass;  and  also  to  the 
metamorphoses  of  Ovid.  This  supposed 
transformation  of  Nebuchadnezzar  some 
have  ascribed  to  Satan.  Joh.  Wier  de 
pr^stigiis  diemouuui,  I.  26,  iv.  1.  Otherd 


220 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  570 


be  -with  the  beasts  of  the  field,  and 
the}'  shall  make  thee  to  eat  grass  »  as 

a  Ps.  106.  20. 


oxen,  and  they  shall  ■v\-et  thee  wills 
the  dew  of  heaven,  and  seven  times 


hnve  nttributod  it  to  the  arts  of  rnngic  or 
inciiiUation,  and  suppose  that  it  was  a 
chans;e  in  appearance  only.  Augustine 
(de  iJ;  vit.  Dei.  lib.  xviii.  cap.  17),  refer- 
ring !o  what  is  said  of  Diorued  and  his 
followers  on  their  return  from  Troy,  that 
they  were  changed  into  birds,  says  that ' 
Varro,  in  proof  of  the  truth  of  this,  ap- 
peals to  the  fact  that  Circe  changed 
Ulysses  and  his  companions  into  beasts; 
and  to  the  Arcadians,  who,  by  swimming  1 
over  a  certain  lake,  were  changed  into  | 
wolves,  and  that  "  if  they  are  no  man's 
flesh,  at  the  end  of  nine  years  they  swam  | 
over  the  same  lake  and  became  men 
again."  Yarro  farther  mentions  the  case 
of  a  man  by  the  name  of  Dacmonetus, 
who,  tasting  of  the  sacrifices  which  the  Ar- 
cadians offered  (a  child),  was  turned  into 
a  wolf,  and  became  a  man  again  at  the 
end  of  two  j'ears.  Augustine  himself 
says,  that  when  he  was  in  Italy  he  heard 
a  report  that  there  were  women  there, 
who,  by  giving  one  a  little  drug  in  cheese, 
had  the  power  of  turning  him  into  an 
ass.  See  the  curious  discussion  of  Augus- 
tine how  far  this  could  be  true,  in  his  work 
de  Civit.  Dei,  lib.  xviii.  cap.  18.  He  sup- 
poses that  under  the  influence  of  drugs  men 
xnight  be  made  to  srijjjjnse  they  were  thus 
transformed,  or  to  have  a  recollection  of 
what  passed  in  such  a  state  as  if  it  were 
so.  Cornelius  a  Lapide  supposes  that  the 
transformation  in  the  case  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar went  only  so  far  that  his  knees  were 
bent  in  the  other  direction,  like  those  of 
animals,  and  that  he  walked  like  animals. 
Origen,  and  many  of  those  who  have 
coincided  with  him  in  his  allegorial  mode 
of  interpreting  the  Scriptures,  supposed 
that  the  whole  of  this  account  is  an 
allegory,  designed  to  represent  the  fall 
of  Satan,  and  his  restoration  again  to  the 
favovir  of  God — in  accordance  with  his 
belief  of  the  doctrine  of  universal  salva- 
tion. Others  suppose  that  the  statement 
here  means  merely  that  there  was  a  for- 
miilable  conspiracy  against  him:  that  he 
was  dethroned  and  bound  with  fetters ; 
that  Vie  was  then  expelled  from  the  courf^, 
and  driven  into  exile:  and  that,  as  such, 
ae  lived  a  miserable  life,  finding  a  pre- 
;-arious  subsistence  in  woods  and  wilds, 
uuong  the  beasts  of  the  forest,  until,  by 


another  revolution,  he  was  restored  agaic 
to  the  throne.  It  is  not  necessary  to  ex- 
amine these  various  opinions,  and  tc 
show  their  absurdity,  their  puerility,  oi 
their  falsehood.  Some  of  them  are  sim- 
ply ridiculous,  and  none  of  them  are 
demanded  by  any  fair  interpretation  of 
the  chajjter.  It  may  seem,  perhaps,  to 
bo  undignified  even  to  refer  to  such  opi- 
nions now  ;  but  this  maj' serve  to  illustrate 
the  method  in  which  the  Bible  has  been 
interpreted  in  former  times,  and  the  steps 
which  have  been  taken  before  men 
arrived  at  a  clear  and  rational  interjjre- 
tation  of  the  sacred  volume.  It  is  indeed 
painful  to  reflect  that  such  absurdities 
and  puerilities  have  been  in  any  way 
connected  with  the  interpretation  of  tho 
word  of  God  ;  sad  to  reflect  that  so  many 
persons,  in  consequence  of  them,  have 
discarded  the  Bible  and  the  interpreta- 
tions together  as  equallj'  ridiculous  and 
absurd.  The  true  account  in  regard  to 
the  calamity  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  un- 
doubtedly the  following:  (1.)  He  was  a 
maniac — made  such  by  a  direct  divine 
judgment  on  account  of  his  pride,  vs. 
30,  31.  The  essential  thing  in  the  state- 
ment is,  that  he  was  deprived  of  his  rea- 
son, and  that  he  was  treated  ns  a  maniac. 
Comp.  Intro,  to  the  chapter,  II.  (1). — 
(2.)  The  particular  furin  of  the  insanity 
with  which  ho  was  afflicted,  seems  to 
have  been  that  he  imagined  himself  to  bo 
a  beast ;  and,  this  idea  having  taken  pos- 
session of  his  mind,  he  acted  accordingly. 
It  may  be  remarked  in  regard  to  this, 
(a)  that  such  a  fancj'  is  no  uncommon 
thing  among  maniacs.  Numerous  in- 
stances of  this  maybe  seen  in  the  various 
works  on  insanity — or  indeed  may  be 
seen  by  merely  visiting  a  lunatic  asy- 
lum. One  imagines  that  he  is  a.  king, 
and  decks  himself  out  with  a  sceptre  and 
a  diadem  ;  another  that  he  is  glass,  and 
is  filled  with  excessive  anxiety  lest  he 
should  be  broken  ;  others  have  regarded 
themselves  as  deprived  of  their  proper 
nature  as  human  beings  ;  others  as  hav 
ing  been  once  dead,  and  restored  to  life 
again  ;  others  as  having  been  dead  and 
sent  back  into  life  without  a  heart; 
others  as  existing  in  a  manner  unlike 
any  other  mortals;  others  as  having  no 


B.  C.  570.] 


CHAPTER    IV. 


22 1 


shall  pass  ever  tliec,  till  thot  know  [kingdom  of  men,  and  glveth  it  to 
that   the  Most  lli^h  ^  ruleth  in  the  whomsoever  he  will. 


«Pg.  ho.  IS. 


rational  soul.  See  Arnold  on  Insanity, 
I.  pp.  170 — 195.  In  all  those  cases,  wben 
such  a  fancy  takes  possession  of  the 
mind,  there  will  be  an  effort  on  the  part 
of  the  patient  to  act  in  exact  conformity 
to  this  view  of  himself,  and  his  whole 
conduct  will  be  adapted  to  it.  Nothing 
can  convince  bini  that  it  is  not  so;  and 
*here  is  no  absurdity  in  supposing  that, 
:f  the  thought  had  taken  possession  of 
the  mind  of  Nebuchadnezzar  that  he  was 
a  beast,  he  would  live  and  act  as  a  wild 
beast — just  as  it  is  said  that  he  did. 
(fi)  In  itself  considered,  if  Nebuchad- 
nezzar was  deprived  of  his  reason,  and 
for  the  cause  assigned — his  pride,  no- 
thing is  more  probable  than  that  he  would 
be  left  to  imagine  himself  .a  beast,  and  to 
act  like  a  beast.  This  would  furnish  the 
most  striking  contrast  to  his  former  state  ; 
would  d;>  most  to  bring  down  his  pride  ; 
and  would  most  effectually  show  the 
supremacy  of  the  Most  High.  (3)  In 
this  state  of  mind,  fancying  himself  a 
wild  beast,  and  endeavouring  to  act  in 
conformity  with  this  view,  it  is  probable 
that  he  would  be  indulged  as  far  as  was 
consistent  with  his  safety.  Perhaps  the 
regency  would  be  induced  to  allow  this 
partly  from  their  long  habits  of  deference 
to  the  will  of  an  arbitrary  monarch ; 
partly  because  by  this  indulgence  he 
would  bo  less  troublesome;  and  partly 
because  a  painful  spectacle  would  thus 
be  removed  from  the  palace.  We  are  not 
to  suppose  that  he  was  permitted  to  roam 
in  forests  at  large  without  any  restraint, 
and  without  any  supervision  whatever. 
In  BabyJDn.  attached  to  the  palace,  there 
were  Uoubtless,  as  there  are  all  over  the 
East,  royal  parks  or  gardens  ;  there  is 
every  probability  that  in  these  parks 
there  may  have  been  assembled  rare  and 
strange  animals  as  a  royal  menagerie; 
and  it  was  doubtless  in  these  parks,  and 
among  these  animals,  that  he  was  allowed 
to  range.  Painful  as  such  a  spectacle 
would  be,  yet  it  is  not  improbable  that  to 
nuch  a  maniac  this  would  be  allowed  as 
contributing  to  bis  gratilicaiinn,  (jr  as  a 
means  of  restoring  him  to  his  right  mind. 
(i)  A  king,  iiowevcr  wide  bis  empire,  or 
magnificent  his  court,  would  be  as  likely 
to  be  subject  to  mental  derangement  as 
any  other  man.     No  situation  in  life  can 

ly* 


save  the  human  mind  from  the  liability 
to  so  overwhelming  a  calamity,  nor  should 
we  deem  it  strange  that  it  should  come 
on  a  king  as  well  as  other  men.  The 
condition  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  as  repre- 
sented by  himself  in  this  edict,  was 
scarcely  more  pitiable  than  that  of 
George  III.  of  England — though  it  is  not 
surprising  that  in  the  eighteenth  century 
of  the  Christian  era,  and  in  a  Christian 
land,  the  treatment  of  the  sovereign  in 
such  circumstances  was  different  from 
that  which  a  monarch  received  in  hea- 
then Babylon.  (5)  It  cannot  bo  shown 
that  this  did  not  come  upon  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, as  stated  in  this  chapter,  (vs. 
30,  31,)  on  account  of  his  pride.  That  he 
teas  a  proud  and  haughty  monarch,  is 
apparent  from  all  his  history;  that  God 
Would  take  some  effectual  means  to  hum- 
ble him,  is  in  accordance  with  bis  deal- 
ings with  mankind;  that  this  would  be 
a  most  effectual  means  of  doing  it,  cannot 
be  doubted.  No  one  can  prove,  in  re- 
spect to  mnj  judgment  that  comes  upon 
mankind,  that  it  is  not  on  account  of  some 
sin  reigning  in  the  heart;  and  when  it  is 
affirmed  in  a  book  claiming  to  be  inspired, 
that  a  particular  calamity  is  brought 
upon  men  on  account  of  their  trans- 
gressions, it  cannot  be  demonstrated  that 
the  statement  is  not  true.  If  these  re- 
marks are  correct,  then  no  well-founded 
objection  can  lie  against  the  account 
here  respecting  the  calamity  that  came 
upon  this  monarch  in  Babylon.  This 
opinion  in  regard  to  the  nature  of  the 
affliction  which  came  upon  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, is  probably  that  which  is  now 
generally  entertained,  and  it  certainly 
meets  all  the  circumstances  of  the  case, 
and  frees  the  narrative  from  material  ob- 
jection. As  a  confirmation  of  its  truth, 
I  will  copj-  here  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Mead, 
as  it  is  found  in  his  'Medica  Sacra;' 
"All  the  circumstances  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's case  agree  so  well  with  an  hypo- 
chondriacal madness,  that  to  me  it  ap- 
pears evident  that  Nebuchadnezzar  was 
seized  with  this  distemper,  and  under  its 
influence  ran  wiM  into  the  fields;  and 
that,  fancying  himself  transformed  int>> 
an  o.\,  he  fed  on  grass  after  the  manner 
of  cattle.  For  every  sort  of  madness  is 
the   result  of  a  disturbed   imagination ; 


nhich  this  unhappy  man  laboured  under 
for  full  seven  year^.  And  through  ne- 
glect of  tnk'na:  proper  care  of  himself,  his 
hair  and  nails  grew  to  an  uncommon 
length ;  whereby  the  latter,  growing 
thicker  and  crooked,  resembled  the  claws 
of  birds.  Now  the  ancients  culled  peo- 
ple affected  with  this  kind  of  madness, 
Xuvai'Sptorroi — Wulj-mcn,  or  (fiU'orSpdmoi — 
(lor/. men,  because  they  went  abroad  in  the 
night  imitating  wolves  or  dogs  ;  particu- 
larly intent  upon  opening  the  sepulchres 
of  the  dead,  and  had  their  legs  much 
ulcerated,  either  from  frequent  falls,  or 
the  bites  of  dogs.  In  like  manner  are  the 
iaughters  of  Proetus  related  to  have  been 
mad,  who,  as  Virgil  says,  .^n.  vi.  48, 

iinplcrunt  falsis  mugitibus  afrro?. 

'  With  mimic  bowlings  filleil  the  fields.' 

For,  as  Servius  observes,  Juno  possessed 
their  minds  with  such  a  species  of  furj', 
that,  fancying  themselves  cows,  they  ran 
into  the  fields,  bellowed  often,  and 
dreaded  the  plough.  Nor  was  this  dis- 
order unknown  to  the  moderns,  for 
Schneckius  records  a  remarkable  instance 
of  a  husbandman  in  Padua,  who,  imag- 
ining himself  a  wolf,  attacked  and  even 
killed  several  people  in  the  fields ;  and 
when  at  length  he  was  taken,  he  perse- 
vered in  declaring  himself  a  real  wolf, 
and  that  the  only  difference  consisted  in 
the  inversion  of  his  skin  and  hair."  The 
same  opinion  as  to  the  nature  of  the  dis- 
ease is  expressed  by  Dr.  J.  M.  Good,  in 
his  "  Study  of  Medicine."  So  also  Bur- 
ton (Anatomy  of  Melancholy,  Part  I.  ^  1. 
Memb.  i.  Subs.  4).  Burton  refers  to  sev- 
eral cases  which  would  illustrate  the 
opinion.  "  Wierus,"  says  he,  "  tells  a 
story  of  such  a  one  in  Padua,  1541,  that 
would  not  believe  the  contrary  but  that 
he  was  a  wnlf.  He  hath  another  instance 
of  a  Spaniard  who  thought  himself  a 
bear.  Such,  belike,  or  little  better,  were 
king  Proetus'  daughters,  that  thought 
themselves  l-ine" — an  instance  strikingly 
resembling  this  case  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
who  seems  to  have  imagined  himself  some 
kind  of  beast.  Pliny,  perhaps  referring 
to  diseases  of  this  kind,  says,  "Some 
men  were  turned  into  wolves  in  my  time, ' 
and  from  wolves  to  men  again."  Lib.  viii. 
c.  22.  See  Burton  as  above.  ^  And  thy  \ 
'iwelUiifj  sliall  be  with  the  hecint-i  of  the 
fifkl.  That  is,  as  above  explained,  thou  j 
wilt  imagine  thyself  to  be  a  beast,  and  i 
Tilt  act  like  a  beast.     Indulgence  will  be  { 


DANIEL.  [B.C.  570, 

given  to  this  propensity  so  as  to  alloTf 
you  to  range  with  the  beasts  in  the  park, 
or  the  royal  menagerie.  •[  And  they  shall 
make  thee  to  eat  grass  as  oxen.  That  is, 
this  shall  be  thy  propensity,  and  thoa 
shalt  be  indulged  in  it.  Fancying  him- 
self a  beast  of  some  kind — probably,  as 
appears  from  this  expression,  an  ox-— 
nothing  would  be  more  natural  than  that 
he  should  attempt  to  live  as  oxen  do, 
on  grass,  that  he  should  be  so  far  in- 
dulged that  his  food  would  consist  of 
vegetables.  Nothing  is  more  common 
among  maniacs  than  some  such  freak  about 
food  ;  and  it  is  just  as  likely  that  a  king 
would  manifest  this  as  any  other  man. 
The  word  grass  here —  NSVi"  — Ileb.  3i;'>;  — 
means  properly  herbs ;  green  herbs ;  vegeta- 
bles, represented,  commonly,  as  furnish- 
ing food  for  man.  Gen.  i.  11,  12,  ii.  5, 
iii.  18 ;  Ex.  x.  12,  15  ;  Ps.  civ.  14.  Tho 
word  grass,  in  our  language,  conve3's  an 
idea  which  is  not  strictly  in  accordance 
with  the  original.  That  word  would  de- 
note only  the  vegetable  productions  which 
cattle  eat;  the  Hebrew  word  is  of  a  more 
general  signification,  embracing  all  kinds 
of  vegetables — those  which  man  eats,  as 
well  as  those  which  animals  eat,  and  the 
meaning  here  is,  that  he  would  live  on 
vegetable  food; — a  propensity  in  which 
they  would  doubtless  indulge  a  man  in 
such  circumstances — painful  and  humili- 
ating as  it  would  be.  The  phrase  *  they 
shall  make  thee  eat  grass,'  rather  means, 
'  they  shall  permit  thee  to  do  it,'  or  they 
shall  treat  thee  so  that  thou  wilt  do  it. 
It  would  be  his  inclination,  and  they 
would  allow  him  to  be  gratified  in  it. 
^  And  they  shall  leet  thee  with  the  deto 
of  heaven.  Or,  shall  suffer  you  to  be  wet 
with  the  dew  of  heaven  ;  that  is,  to  be  out 
in  the  open  air — no  improbable  treat- 
ment of  a  maniac,  and  especially  likely 
to  occur  in  a  climate  where  it  was  no 
uncommon  thing  for  all  classes  of  per- 
sons to  pass  the  night  under  the  sky. 
^  And  seven  times  shall  pass  over  thee. 
Notes  on  ver  16.  •[  Till  thou  know,  &c. 
Until  thou  shalt  effectuallj'  learn  that  the 
true  God  rules  ;  that  he  gives  authority 
to  whom  he  pleases;  and  that  he  fakes  it 
away  when  he  pleases.  Notes  on  ver.  17. 
Nothing  could  be  better  fitted  to  teach  Ibis 
lesson  than  to  deprive,  by  a  manifest 
judgment  of  heaven,  such  a  monarch 
of  the  exercise  of  reason,  and  reduce 
him  to  the  pitiable  condition  here  de- 
scribed. 


B.  C.  570.] 


CHAPTER    IV, 


223 


2G  And -whereas  they  comnianded  I  after  that  thou  shall  have  known 
to  l(3;ive  the  stump  of  the  tree  roots  ;  that  the  a  heavens  do  rule, 
thy  kingdom  shall  be  sui-e  unto  thee,  I       27  Wherefore,    0   king,    let   my 
»Matt.  5.  34;  Lu.  15. 18,  21.  I  Counsel  be  acceptable  unto  thee,  and 


20.  And  whereas  ilicj/  commanded.  The 
■watcher!!,  ver.  15.  Coinp.  ver.  17.  ^  To 
leave  the  stump  of  the  tree  root's.  Or,  to 
k'iivc  routs  to  the  stump  of  the  tree;  that 
is,  it  was  not  to  be  dnj;  up.  or  wliolly  de- 
stroyed, but  vitalitj'  was  to  be  left  in  the 
ground.  The  Chaldee  here  is  the  same 
as  in  ver.  15,  'leave  the  stump  of  his 
roots.'  ^  Thy  kinr/dom  shall  he  sure  unto 
thee.  That  is,  thou  shalt  not  die  under 
this  calamity,  but  after  it  has  passed 
away  shalt  be  restored  to  authority.  It 
iiiiijht  have  been  supposed  that  this  meant 
that  the  authority  would  survive  in  his 
family,  and  that  those  who  were  to  suc- 
ceed him  would  reign — as  shoots  spring 
up  after  the  parent  tree  has  fallen  ;  but 
Daniel  was  directed  to  an  interpretation 
which  is  not  less  in  accordance  with  the 
fair  meaning  of  the  dream  than  this  would 
have  been.  •[  After  that  thou  shall  have 
/.■n<i)cn  that  the  heai-eiis  do  rule.  That 
God  rules.  This  was  the  great  lesson 
which  the  event  was  designed  to  teach, 
and  when  that  should  have  been  learned, 
there  would  be  a  proprietj'  that  he  should 
be  restored  to  his  throne,  and  should 
proclaim  this  to  the  world. 

27.  Wherefore,  0  hinrj.  let  mr/  couniel 
be  acccjjtable  unto  thee.  Daniel  was  per- 
mitted to  see  not  only  the  fact  that  this 
calamitj-  impended  over  the  king,  but  the 
cause  of  it,  and  as  that  cause  was  his 
proud  and  sinful  heart,  he  supposed  that 
the  judgment  might  be  averted  if  the 
king  would  reform  his  life.  If  the  cause 
were  removed,  he  iuferrod,  not  unreason- 
ably, that  there  was  .a  hope  that  the  cala- 
mity might  be  avoided.  We  cannot  but 
admire  here  the  boldness  and  fidelity  of 
Daniel,  who  not  only  gave  a  fair  inter- 
pretation of  the  dream,  in  the  case  sub- 
mitted to  him,  but  who  went  bcycmd  that 
in  a  faitliful  representation  to  the  m.ost 
mighty  monarch  of  the  age,  that  this  was 
iii  consequence  of  his  wicked  life.  *^^And 
break  off  thi/  sins  bij  righteousness.  By 
acts  of  righteousness  or  justice ;  by 
abmdoning  a  wicked  course  of  life.  It 
is  fairly  to  be  inferred  from  this  that  the 
life  of  the  monirch  had  been  wicked — a 
fact  which  is  confirmed  every  where  in 
his  historj'.     He  had,  indeed,  some  good 


qualities  as  a  man,  but  he  was  proud ;  he 
was  ambitious  ;  he  was  arbitrary  in  his 
government;  he  was  passionate  and  re- 
vengeful ;  and  he  was,  doubtless,  addicted 
to  such  pleasures  of  life  as  were  com- 
monly found  among  those  of  his  station. 
He  had  a  certain  kind  of  respect  for  reli- 
gion, whatever  was  the  object  of  worship, 
but  this  was  not  inconsistent  with  a 
wicked  life.  The  word  translated  break 
off — p^i5,  is  rendered  in  the  Vulgate  re- 
dime,  '  redeem' andi  so  in  the  Greek  of 
Theodotion,  Xvrpioaat,  and  in  the  Codex 
Chis.  From  this  use  of  the  word  iu  some 
of  the  versions,  and  from  the  fact  that  the 
word  rendered  righteousness  is  often  em- 
ployed in  the  later  Hebrew  to  denote  alms- 
giving, (comp.  the  margin  in  Matt.  vi.  1, 
and  the  Greek  text  in  Tittmann  and  H.ihn 
where  the  word  iiKaioavvni'  is  used  to  de- 
note alms,)  the  passage  here  has  been 
adduced  in  favour  of  the  doctrine  of  ex- 
piatory merits,  and  the  purchase  of  abso- 
lution by  almsgiving — a  favourite  doc- 
trine in  the  Roman  Catholic  communion. 
But  the  ordinary  and  common  meaning 
of  the  word  is  not  to  redeem,  but  to 
break,  to  break  off,  to  abandon.  It  is  the 
word  from  which  our  English  word  break 
is  derived,  Germ,  brecken.  Comp.  Gen. 
xxvii.  40,  "  that  thou  shalt  break  his 
yoke ;"  Ex.  xxxii.  2,  "  Break  off  the 
golden  ear-rings;"  Ex.  xxxii.  .^,  ''And 
all  the  people  brake  off  the  golden  ear- 
rings ;"  Ex.  xxxii.  24,  "  Whosoever  hath 
any  gold  let  them  break  it  off;"  1  Kings 
xix.  11,  "A  great  and  strong  wind 
rent  the  mountains;"  Zech.  xi.  16,  "And 
tear  their  claws  in  pieces ;"  Ezek.  xix. 
12,  "his  strong  holds  were  broken.' 
The  word  is  rendered  in  our  com- 
mon version,  redeem  once,  (Ps.  cxxxvi.  4,) 
"And  hath  redeemed  us  from  our  ene- 
mies." It  is  translated  rending  in  Ps. 
vii.  2,  and  deliver  in  Lam.  v.  8.  It 
does  not  elsewhere  occur  in  the  Scrip- 
tures. The  fiiir  meaning  of  the  word,  is, 
as  in  our  version,  to  break  off',  and  the 
idea  of  redeeming  the  soul  by  acts  of 
charity  or  almsgiving  is  not  in  the  pas- 
sage, and  cannot  be  derived  from  it. 
This   passage,  therefore,    cannot   be  ad- 


224 


DANIEL 


[B.  C.  570 


break  »ofl' thy  sins  by  righteousness,  I  mercy  to  the   poor;  if  t  it  maybe 
and   thino   iniquities    by    showing  "^  a  lengthening  of  thy  tranquillity. 


'  Is.  55.  7. 


bPs.  41.1, 


duced  to  defend  the  doctrine  that  the  soul 
may  be  redeemed,  or  that  sins  may  be 
expiated  by  acts  of  charity  and  almsgiv- 
ing. It  means  that  the  king  was  to  break 
off  his  sins  by  acts  of  righteousness;  or, 
in  other  words,  he  was  to  show  by  a  right- 
eous life  that  he  had  abandoned  his  evil 
course.  The  exhortation  is,  that  he  would 
practice  those  great  duties  of  justice  and 
charity  towards  mankind  in  which  he 
had  been  so  deficient,  if,  perhaps,  God 
might  show  mercy,  and  avert  the  im- 
pending calamity.  *J^  And  thine  iniqui- 
ties hy  showing  mercy  to  the  poor.  The 
peculiar  'iniquity'  of  Nebuchadnezz.ir 
may  have  consisted  in  his  oppressing  the 
poor  of  his  realm  in  the  exorbitant  exac- 
tions imposed  on  them  in  carrj'ing  on  his 
public  works,  and  building  and  beauti- 
fying his  capital.  Life,  under  an  Oriental 
despot,  is  regarded  as  of  little  value. 
Sixty  thousand  men  were  employed  by 
Mohammed  Ali  in  digging  the  ennal  from 
Cairo  to  Alexandria,  in  which  work 
almost  no  tools  were  furnished  them  but 
their  hands.  A  large  portion  of  them 
died,  and  were  buried  by  their  fellow- 
labourers  in  the  earth  excavated  in  dig- 
ging the  canal.  Who  can  estimate  the 
number  of  men  that  were  uselessly  em- 
ploj'ed  under  the  arbitrary  monarch  of 
Egypt  on  the  useless  work  of  building  the 
pyramids?  Those  structures,  doubtless, 
cost  millions  of  lives,  and  there  is  no  im- 
probability in  supposing  that  Nebuchad- 
nezzar had  emploj'ed  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands of  persons  without  any  adequate 
compensation,  and  in  a  hard  and  oppres- 
sive service,  in  roaring  the  walls  and  the 
palaces  of  Babylon,  and  in  excavating 
the  canals  to  water  the  city  and  the  ad- 
jacent country.  No  counsel,  therefore, 
could  be  more  appropriate  than  that  he 
should  relieve  the  poor  from  those  bur- 
dens, and  do  justice  to  them.  There 
is  no  intimation  that  he  was  to  attempt 
to  purchase  release  from  the  judgments 
of  God  by  such  acts;  but  the  meaning 
is,  that  if  he  would  cease  from  his  aet.s 
of  oppression,  it  might  be  hoped  that 
God  would  avert  the  threatened  cala- 
mity. The  duty  here  enjoined  of  show- 
ing mercy  to    the    poor,  is    one   that  is 


'  or,  a  healing  of  thine  error. 


everywhere  commanded  in  the  Scrip- 
tures. Ps.  xli.  1  ;  Matt.  xix.  21  ;  Gal. 
ii.  10,  et  sccpe.  Its  influence  in  obtain- 
ing the  divine  favour,  or  in  averting 
calamit}%  is  also  elsewhere  stated.  Con))!. 
Ps.  xli.  1,  "  Blessed  is  he  that  considerelh 
the  poor ;  the  Lord  will  deliver  him  in 
time  of  trouble."  It  is  a  sentiment  which 
occurs  frequently  in  the  books  of  the 
Apocrypha,  and  in  these  books  there  can 
be  found  the  progress  of  the  <ipinion 
to  the  point  which  it  reached  in  the  later 
periods  of  the  Jewish  history,  and  which 
it  has  obtained  in  the  Roman  Catholio 
communion,  that  almsgiving  or  charity 
to  the  poor  would  be  an  expiation  for  sin, 
and  Vi-ould  commend  men  to  God  as  a 
ground  of  righteousness  ;  or,  in  other 
words,  the  progress  of  the  doctrine  to- 
wards that  which  teaches  that  works  of 
supererogation  may  be  performed.  Thus 
in  the  Book  of  Tobit  _(iv.  S— 10),  "If 
thou  hast  abundance,  give  alms  accord- 
ingly ;  if  thou  have  little,  be  not  afraid 
to  give  according  to  that  little:  for  thou 
layest  up  a  good  treasure  for  thyself 
against  the  day  of  necessity.  Uecunse 
that  alma  do  deliver  from  death,  and  suf- 
fereth  not  to  come  into  darkness."  Tobit 
xii.  9,  10,  "For  alms  doth  deliver  from 
death,  and  shall  purge  atcay  all  sin.  Those 
that  exercise  righteousness  and  alms  shall 
be  filled  with  life ;  but  they  that  sin 
are  enemies  to  their  own  life."  Tobit 
xiv.  10,  11,  "  Mnnasses  gave  alms,  and 
escaped  the  snares  of  death  which  they 
had  set  for  him  ;  but  Amam  fell  into  the 
snare  and  perished.  Wherefore  now,  m^ 
son,  consider  what  alms  doeth,  and  how 
righteousness  doth  deliver."  Ecclesi- 
asticus  xxix.  12,  13,  "Shut  up  alms 
in  thy  storehouses;  it  shall  deliver  thee 
from  all  afliiction.  It  shall  fight  for  thee 
against  thine  enemies  better  than  a 
mighty  shield  and  a  strong  spear."  Eccie- 
siasticus  xl.  24.  "Brethren  and  help  aro 
against  time  of  trouble ;  but  alms  shall  de- 
liver more  than  them  both."  In  tnese  pas- 
sages there  is  evidence  of  the  progress  of 
the  sentiment  towards  the  doctrines  of 
supererogation;  but  there  is  none  what- 
ever that  Daniel  attributed  any  such 
efiicacy  to  alms,  or  that  he  meant  to  teach 
anything  more  than  the  common  doctrine 


B.C.  570.1  CIIAPTEE    IV.  225 

28  ^  All  this  came  upon  the  king  f  he  ATalked  ^  in  the    palace   of   the 
Nebucha-Liezzai-.  ,  kinj^doin  of  Baljylwii. 

29  At  the  end  of  t^velva   months'  ^oT,nj}on. 


of  religion,  tbat  when  a  man  breaks  off  he  would  not  break  off  from  it,  even  while 
from  his  sins  it  may  be  hoped  that  the  ;  he  admitted  the  fact  that  he  was  exposed 
judgments  wliich  impended  over  him  on  account  of  it  to  so  awful  a  jiidi^ment — 
may  be  averted,  and  that  doing  good  will  as  multitudes  do  who  pursue  a  course  of 
meet  the  smiles  and  approbation  of  God.  i  iniquity,  even  while  they  admit  that  it 
Compare  in  reference  to  this  «?ntiment  j  "ill  he  followed  by  poverty,  disgrace, 
the  case  of  the  Ninevites,  when  the  I  disease  and  death  here,  and  by  the  wrath 
threatening  against  them  was  averted  by  of  God  hereafter;  or,  it  may  be,  that  he 
their  repeirtauce  and  humiliation,  Jonah  did  not  credit  the  representation  which 
lii.  10;  the  ca^e  of  Hezekiah,  when  his  ;  Daniel  made,  and  refused  to  follow  his 
predicted  death  was  averted  by  his  tears  I  counsel  on  that  account;  or,  it  may  be, 
and  prayers,  Isa.  ,\x.\viii.  1—5;  and  .Jer.  ;  that,  though  he  purposed  to  repent,  yet, 
xviii.  7,   8,    where  this  principle  of   the   -is  thousands  of  others  do,  he  suffered  the 


divine  goverament  is  fully  asserted.  ^//' 
■it  may  he  a  lenytiicning  of  thtj  traiiquiUltij. 
Marg.,  '  or,  nn  healinj  of  tliij  error.'    The 


time  to  pass  on  until  the  forbearance  of 
God  was  exhausted,  and  the  calamity 
came   suddenly  upon  him.     A  full  year, 


Greek  of  Theodotion  here  is,  "  Perhaps  i  it  would  seem  (ver.  29),  was  given  him  to 
God  will  be  long-siifi'ering  toward  thy  see  what  the  effect  of  the  admonition 
offences."  The  Greek  of  the  Codex  |  would  bo,  and  then  all  that  had  been  pre- 
Chis.  is,  'And  thou  mayest  remain  a  !  dieted  was  fulfilled.  His  conduct  furnishes 
Ion"-  time— roXinVcpoj  yciTj— upon  the  I  a  remarkable  illustration  of  the  conduct  of 
throne  of  thy  kingdom.'  The  Vulgate,  I  sinners  under  threatened  wrath  :  of  the 
'  Perhaps  he  wUl  pardon  thy  faults.'  The  ,  f^i^t  that  they  continue  to  live  in  sin  when 
S3Tiae,  '  Until  he  mav  remove  from  thee  |  exposed  to  certain  destruction,  and  when 
thv  follies.'  The  oViginal  word  ren-  !  warned  in  the  plainest  manner  of  what 
,  '     ,     ,       ,7      .  ,.»_,.  .,         will  come  upon  them. 

dered    lenr/theiuiia — nii-in" — means     pro-        ..      <^w  ,    ^- ^      ?  ,;         a  f ,  . 

•'  ,    '     '  ?  29.   At  the  end  oj  ticdve  months.     After 

perly,  as  translated  here,  a  prolongation  ;  ^j,g  jj.^,j,^,^  .^^j  jl^^  interpretation— giv- 
a  drawing  out;  a  lengthening;  and  the  \  ■  1,;,^^  ^^^^^^  opportunity  to  repent  and 
word  IS  here  correctly  rendered.  It  has  ;  ^^  reform  his  life,  and  to  avoid  the  ca- 
not  the  meaning  assigned  to  it  in  the  ,  i.^,^,ity_  i^  jj^  walked  in  the  x>ulacc. 
margin— of  healing.     It  would  apply  pro- ;  jj.^j.^^  ^  rj.^^   margin   is   the   more 

perly  to  a  prolongation  of  anything— as  i  correct  rendering.  The  roofs  of  houses 
of  life,  peace,  health,  prosperity.  The  ^^  ^j^^  ^^^^  j,re  made  flat,  and  furnish  a 
word  rendered  rra)ii/in7//(// — r\hz' — means  !  common  place  of  promenade,  especially 
properly  security,  safety,  quiet;  and  the  in  the  cool  of  the  evening.  See  Notes  on 
reference  here  is  to  his  calm  possession  j  Matt.  ix.  2.  The  Codex  Chis.  has  here, 
of  the  throne  ;  to  his  quietness  in  his  '  The  king  walked  upon  the  walls  of  tho 
palace,  and  peace  in  his  kingdom.  There  city  with  all  his  glory,  and  went  around 
is  nothijig  in  the  test  to  justify  the  ver- [the  towers,  and  answering,  said.'  Tlie 
si)n  in  the  margin.  |  place,  however,  upon  which  he  walked, 

2S.  All  thit  cawe  upon  the  Icing  Xehn-  appears  to  have  been  the  roof  of  his  own 
chadnezz  ir.  Tbat  is,  the  threatened  judg-  !  palace — doubtless  reared  so  high  that  he 
ment  came  upon  hiui  in  the  form  in  which  '■  could  have  a  good  view  of  the  city  frotn 
it  was  predicted.  He  did  not  repent  1  it.  ^  0/ the  kingdom  of  Bithjlon.  Ap- 
and  reform  his  life  as  he  was  exhorted  [  pertaining  to  that  kingdom ;  the  royal 
to,  and,  having  given  him  sufficient  |  residence.  As  it  is  to  be  supposed  that 
time  to  show  whether  he  was  di>posed  to  this  '  palace  of  the  kingdom '  on  the  roof 
follow  the  counsel  of  Daniel,  God  sud-  of  which  the  king  walked,  was  that  which 
ienly  brought  the  heavj' judgment  upon  he  had  himself  reared,  and  as  this  eon- 
him.  Why  he  did  not  follow  the  counsel  tributed  much  to  the  splendour  of  the 
of  Datiiel  is  not  stated,  and  cannot  be  capital  of  his  empire,  and  doubtless 
known.  It  m.ay  have  been  that  he  was  |  was  the  occasion  in  a  considerable  <le' 
80  addicted  t5  a  life  of  wickedness  that  |  gree  of  his   vainglorious  boasting  whep 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  570 


30  The  kino;  -spake,  and  saifl,  Is  I  by  the  might  of  my  po^vel^  and  for 
not  this  great  Bal)ylon,  that  I  have    the  honour  of  my  majesty? 
built  for  the  house  of  the  kingdom  aui.  12. 19  20. 


the  judjjment  of  heaven  fell  upon  him 
(vs.  30,  31),  a  brief  description  of  that 
pahxce  seems  to  be  not  inappropriate. 
The  description  is  copied  from  an  article 
on  Babylon  in  Kitto's  Cyclopcedia  of  Bibli- 
cal Literature,  vol.  i.  pp.  270,  271 :  "  The 
new  palace  built  by  Nebuchadnezzar  was 
prodigious  in  size,  and  superb  in  einbel-  j 
iishraents.  Its  outer  wall  embraced  si.x  ! 
miles;  within  that  circumference  were  | 
two  other  embattled  walls,  besides  a  great 
tower.  Three  brazen  gates  led  into  the 
grand  area,  and  every  gate  of  conse- 
quence throughout  the  city  was  of  brass. 
The  palace  was  beautifully  decorated 
with  statues  of  men  and  animals,  with 
vessels  of  gold  and  silver,  and  furnished 
with  luxuries  of  all  kinds  brought  thither 
from  conquests  in  Egypt,  Palestine,  and 
Tyre.  Its  greatest  boast  were  the  hang- 
ing gardens,  which  acquired,  even  from 
the  Grecian  writers,  the  appellation  of 
one  of  the  wonders  of  the  world.  They 
are  attributed  to  the  gallantry  of  Xcbu- 
chadnezzar,  who  constructed  them  in 
compliance  with  a  wish  of  his  queen 
Auiytis  to  possess  elevated  groves,  such 
as  she  had  enjoyed  on  the  hills  around 
her  native  Ecbatana.  Babylon  was  all 
flat,  and  to  accomplish  so  extravagant  a 
desire,  an  artificial  mountain  was  i eared, 
four  hundred  feet  on  each  side,  while  ter- 
races one  above  another  rose  to  a  height 
that  overtopped  the  walls  of  the  city,  that 
is,  above  three  hundred  feet  in  elevation. 
The  ascent  from  terrace  to  terrace  was 
made  by  corresponding  flights  of  steps, 
while  the  terraces  themselves  were  reared 
to  their  various  stages  or  ranges  of  regu- 
lar piers,  which,  forming  a  kind  of  vaulting, 
rose  in  succession  one  over  the  other  to  the 
required  height  of  each  terrace,  the  whole 
being  bound  together  by  a  wa'l  twenty- 
two  feet  .n  thickness.  The  level  of  ear  h 
terrace  or  garden  was  then  formed  in  the 
following  manner:  the  tops  of  the  piers 
were  first  laid  over  with  fiat  stones,  si.\- 
tcen  feet  in  length,  and  four  in  width; 
on  these  stones  were  spread  beds  of  mat- 
ting, then  a  thick  layer  of  bitumen,  after 
which  came  two  courses  of  bricks,  which 
were  covered  with  sheets  of  solid  lead. 
The  earth  was  heaped  on  this  platform. 
And  in  order  to  admit  the  roots  of  large 


trees,  prodigious  hollow  piers  were  built 
and  tilled  with  mould.  From  the  Eu- 
phrates, v.-hieh  flowed  close  to  the  foun- 
dation, water  was  drawn  up  by  machinery. 
The  whole,  says  Q.  Curtius  (v.  5.),  hiul, 
to  those  who  saw  it  from  a  distance,  the 
appearance  of  woods  overhanging  moun- 
tains. The  remains  of  this  palace  are 
found  in  the  vast  mound  or  hill  called  by 
the  natives  kasr.  It  is  of  irregular  form, 
eight  hundred  yards  in  length,  and  si.x 
hundred  yards  in  breadth.  Its  appear- 
ance is  constantly  undergoing  cliange 
from  the  continual  digging  which  takes 
place  in  its  inexhaustible  quarries  for 
brick  of  the  strongest  and  finest  material. 
Hence  the  mass  is  furrowed  into  deep  ra- 
vines, crossing  and  recrossing  each  other 
in  every  direction." 

30.  The  liiiifj  spnhe,  and  said.  The 
Chaldee,  and  the  Greek  of  Tlieodotion  and 
of  the  Codex  Chis.,  here  is,  'the  king 
ansKered  and  said  :' — perhaps  he  replied 
to  some  remark  made  by  his  attendants 
in  regard  to  the  magnitude  of  the  city  ; 
or  perhaps  the  word  answered  is  used,  as 
it  often  seems  to  be  in  the  Scriptures,  to 
denote  a  reply  to  something  passing  in 
the  mind  that  is  not  uttered ;  to  some 
question  or  inquiry  that  the  mind  starts. 
He  might  merely  have  t>een  thinking  of 
the  magnitude  of  this  city,  and  he  gave 
response  to  those  thoughts  in  the  language 
which  follows.  •[  Is  not  this  ijreat  Baby- 
lon, that  I  haw  hitilf.  In  regard  to  the 
situation  and  the  magnitude  of  Babylon, 
and  the  agency  of  Nebuchadnezzar  in 
beautifying  and  enlarging  it,  see  the 
'  Analysis'  prefixed  to  the  Notes  on  the 
xiiith  chapter  of  Isaiah.  He  greatly 
enlarged  the  city  ;  built  a  new  city  on  the 
west  side  of  the  river;  reared  a  magnifi- 
cent palace:  and  constructed  the  cele- 
brated hanging  gardens,  and,  in  fact, 
made  the  city  so  dift'erent  from  what  it 
was,  and  so  greatly  increased  its  splen- 
dour, that  he  could  say  without  im- 
propriety that  he  had  '  built'  it.  •[  For 
the  house  of  the  hin<jdom.  To  be  con- 
sidered altogether — embracing  the  whole 
city — as  a  sort  of  palace  of  the  kiijgdouj. 
He  seems  to  have  looked  upon  the  whole 
city  as  one  vast  pakxce  fitted  to  be  an 
appropriate  residence  of  the  sovereign  trf 


B.  C.  570.] 


CHAPTER   IV. 


22S 


31  While  =tho  ■oord  was  in  the 
king's  moutl),  there  fell  a  voice  from 
heaven,  saijiiig,  0  king  Nebnchad- 
nezzar,  to  thee  it  is  spoken  ;  The 
kingdom  is  departed  from  thee. 

32  And  ''they  shall  drive  thee 
from  men,  and  thy  dwelling  shall 


» 1  Th. 


b  ver.  25,  26. 


he  Avith  the  heists  of  tht  field:  ihej 
shall  make  thee  to  eat  grass  as  cxen, 
and  seven  times  shall  pass  over  tliee, 
until  thou  know  that  the  Most  High 
ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of  men,  and 
giveth  it  to  whomsoever  he  will. 

33  The  same  hour  was  the  thing 
fulfilled  upon  Nebuchadnezzar:  and 


go  viist  an  erapire.  ^  And  for  llie  honour 
of  my  majesfi/.  To  ennoble  or  glorify  my 
reign  ;  or  where  one  of  so  much  mnjesty 
as  I  am  may  find  an  appropriate  liome. 

31.  ir/nVe  the  irord  was  in  the  I:ni//'s 
mouth.  Ill  the  very  act  of  his  speaking — 
thus  showing  that  there  could  be  no  doubt 
as  to  the  connection  between  the  crime 
and  the  punishment.  *[  There  fell  a  voice 
from  heaven.  There  came  a  voice ;  or, 
perhaps,  it  seemed  to  fall  as  a  thunder- 
bolt. It  was  uttered  above  him,  and  ap- 
peared to  come  from  heaven.  There  was 
an  important  sense  in  which  it  did  fall 
from  heaven  ;  for  it  was  the  voice  of  God. 
^  Saying,  0  h-ing  Nebuchadnezzar,  to  thee 
,t  is  spoken.  For  you  it  is  particularly 
intended  ;  or  what  is  predicted  is  now 
spoken  to  thee.  •[  The  kinydom  is  de- 
parted from  thee.  Thou  art  about  to 
cease  to  reign.  Up  to  this  time  he  re- 
tained his  reason  that  he  might  distinctly 
understand  the  source  from  whence  the 
judgment  was  to  come,  and  why  it  was 
brought  upcjn  him,  and  that  he  miglit  be 
prepared,  when  he  should  be  recovered 
from  his  insanity,  to  testify  clearly  to 
the  origin  and  the  nature  of  the  judg- 
ment. The  Codex  Chis.  has  an  impor- 
tant addition  to  what  is  said  here,  which, 
though  of  no  authority,  as  having  no- 
thing corresponding  to  it  in  the  original 
text,  yet  states  what  is  in  itself  not  im- 
probable. It  is  as  follows  :  '  And  at  the 
end  of  what  he  was  saying,  he  heard  a 
voice  from  heaven,  To  thee  it  is  spoken, 
0  king  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  kingdom  of 
Babylon  shall  be  taken  away  from  thee, 
and  shall  be  given  to  another,  a  man  de- 
spised or  of  no  rank — ifou9£iT;;<£i'(j  dfSp-JTrw 
— in  thy  house.  Behold,  I  will  place  him 
over  thy  kingdom,  and  thy  power,  and  thy 
glory,  and  thy  luxury — r)>  T/jnc^i)!/ — he 
shall  receive,  until  thou  shall  know  that 
the  God  of  heaven  has  authority  over  the 
kingdom  of  men,  and  gives  it  to  whom- 
ioever  he  will :  but  until  the  rising  of  the 
■un   another  king  shall  rejoice  in   thy 


house,  and  shall  possess  thy  power,  and 
thy  strength,  and  thine  authority,  and 
the  angels  shall  drive  thee  away  for  seven 
yenrs,  and  thou  shalt  not  be  seen,  and 
sh;ilt  not  speak  with  any  man,  but  they 
shall  feed  thee  with  grass  as  oxen,  and 
from  the  herb  of  the  field  shall  be  thy 
support.' 

32.   And  the;/  shall  drive  thee  from  vien, 
<tc.     See  Notes  on  ver  25. 

3."5.    The  same   hour  was  the  thing  ful- 
filled.    On  the  word  hour,  see  Notes  on 
ver.  19.     The  use  of  the  word  here  would 
seem    to    confirm    the    suggestion    there 
made  that  it  means  a  brief  period  of  time. 
The    idea   is   clearly,  that   it   was    done 
instantl3'.       The    event    came    suddenly 
upon   him,    without   any   interval,  as   he 
was     speaking.       ^  Till    his  hairs    were 
grown  like  eagles'  feathers.     By  long  ne- 
glect and  inattention.     The  Greek   ver- 
sion of  Theodotion  has  in  this  place    the 
word    lions    instead    of  eagles:     'till  his 
hairs  were  grown  long  like  that  of  lions;' 
and  the  passage  is  paraphrased  by  Jack- 
I  son   thus,  '  till   his  hair  was  grown  long 
!  and   shagged   like  the   main   of  a  lion.' 
This  would  make   good   sense,  but  it  is 
:  not   the  reading   of    the    Chaldee.     The 
I  Codex     Chis.    reads    it,    'and    my   hairs 
I  were  like  the  wings  of  an  eagle,  and  my 
j  nails  like   those  of  a  lion.'     Tlie  correct 
I  idea  is,  that  his  hair  was  neglected  until 
in  appearance  it  resembled   the  feathers 
of  a    bird.     *[  yliicZ    his  vails  like   birds' 
claws.     No  unnatural    thing,   if  he  was 
driven   out  and  neg.eccoJ  as  the  insane 
J  have  been  in  much   hucr   times,  and  in 
I  much  more  civilized  pnrta  of  the  world. 
I  In  regard  to  the  probability  of  the  state- 
j  ment  here  made  respecting  tlie  treatment 
of    Nebuchadnezzar,    and    the    objection 
derived  from  it  against  the  authenticity 
I  of  the  book  of  Daniel,  see  Intro,  to  the 
I  Chapter,  XL  (1.)     In  addition  to  what  la 
said  there,  the  following  cases  rany  be  re- 
ferred to  as  showing  that  there  is  no  im- 
I  probability  in  supposing  that  what  is  bore 


•22S 


DANIEL. 


jB.  C.  570 


he  -was  driven  from  men,  and  did  I  34  And  at  the  end  of  the  days  1 
eat  grass  as  oxen,  and  his  body  Avas  Nebuchadnezzar  lifted  up  mine  eyea 
■wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven,  till  his   unto  heaven,  and  mine  understand- 


hairs  were  grown  like  eagles'  fea- 
thers, and  his  nails  like  birds'  dates. 

stated  actually  occurred.  The  extracts 
are  taken  from  the  second  annual  Report 
of  the  Prison  Discipline  Society,  and  they 
describe  the  condition  of  some  of  the 
patients  before  they  were  admitted  into 
the  insane  asylum  at  Worcester.  If  these 
things  occurred  in  the  commonwealth  of 
3Iassachusclts,  and  in  the  nineteenth 
century  of  the  Christian  era,  there  is  no- 
thing incredible  in  supposing  that  a 
similar  thing  may  have  occurred  in  an- 
cient heathen  Babylon.  "No.  1.  Had 
been  in  prison  twenty-eight  years  when 
he  was  brought  to  the  Institution.  Dur- 
ing seven  years  he  had  not  felt  the  influ- 
ence of  fire,  and  many  nights  he  had  not 
lain  down  for  fear  of  freezing.  He  had 
not  been  shaved  for  twenty-eight  years, 
and  had  been  provoked  and  excited  by 
the  introduction  of  hundreds  to  see  the 
exhibition  of  his  raving.  No.  2.  Had 
been  in  one  prison  fourteen  3'ears  :  be  was 
naked — his  hair  and  beard  grown  long — 
and  his  skin  so  entirely  filled  with  the 
dust  of  charcoal  as  to  render  it  impossi- 
ble, from  its  appearance,  to  discover  what 
nation  he  was  of.  He  was  in  the  habit 
of  screaming  so  loud  as  to  annoy  the 
whole  neighbourhood,  and  was  considered 
a  most  dangerous  and  desperate  man. 
No.  3.  An  old  man  of  seventy  j'ears  of 
age  or  more;  had  been  chained  for  twenty- 
fa-e  years,  and  had  his  chain  taken 
off  but  once  in  that  time.  No.  4.  A 
female  :  had  so  long  been  confined  with  a 
short  chain  as  wholly  to  lose  the  use  of 
her  lower  limbs.  Her  health  had  been 
materially  impaired  by  confinement,  and 
she  was  unable  to  stand,  and  had  not 
walked  for  years.  No.  8.  Had  been 
ten  years  without  clothes  :  si  most 
inconceivably  filthy  and  degraded  be- 
ing :  exceedingly  violent  and  outrageous. 
No.  9.  Another  female,  exceedingly  liltbj' 
in  her  habits,  had  not  worn  clothes 
for  two  years,  during  which  time  she  had 
been  confined  in  a  filthy  cell,  destitute  of 
everything  like  comfort,  tearing  every- 
thing in  pieces  that  was  given  her. 
No.  10.  Has  been  insane  eight  years  : 
almost  tlie  whole  of  the  time  in  jail  and 
«a  a  cage." 


_  returned  unto  me,  and  I  blessed 
the  Most  High,  and  I  praised  and 

34.  And  at  the  end  of  the  days.  That 
is,  the  time  designated,  to  wit :  the  '  seven 
times'  that  were  to  pass  over  him.  •[  I 
Xchuchadnezzar  lifted  tip  mine  eyes  xuito 
heaven.  Probably  the  first  thing  that  in- 
dicated returning  reason.  It  would  not 
be  unnatural,  on  the  supposition  that  he 
was  deprived  of  reason  at  the  very  instant 
that  a  voice  seemed  to  speak  to  him  from 
heaven,  and  that  he  continued  wholly  in- 
sane or  idiotic  during  the  long  interval 
of  seven  years,  that  the  first  indication 
of  returning  reason  would  be  his  looking 
up  to  the  place  from  whence  that  voice 
seemed  to  come,  as  if  it  were  still 
speaking  to  him.  In  some  forms  of  men- 
tal derangement,  when  it  comes  suddenly 
upon  a  man,  the  eflect  is  wholly  to  an- 
nihilate the  interval,  so  that,  when  rea- 
son is  restored,  the  individual  connects 
in  his  recollection  the  last  thing  which 
occurred  when  reason  censed  with  the 
moment  when  it  is  restored.  A  patient 
had  been  long  an  inmate  of  an  insane 
apartment  in  Providence,  Rhode  Island. 
He  was  a  seaman,  and  had  been  in- 
jured on  the  head  when  his  vessel 
was  in  a  naval  engagement,  and  it 
was  supposed  that  his  brain  had  been 
permanently  affected.  For  many  years 
he  was  idiotic,  and  no  hopes  were  en- 
tertained of  his  recovery.  It  was  at 
length  suggested  that  the  operation  of 
trepanning  should  be  performed,  and  the 
very  instant  that  the  bone  was  raised  from 
its  pressure  on  the  brain,  he  exclaimed, 
'Has  she  struck?'  The  whole  interval  of 
time  was  obliterated  from  his  memorj'. 
Similar  instances  are  mentioned  by  Dr, 
Abererombie  (Intellectual  Powers,  i>p 
252,  253).  A  man  had  been  employed 
for  a  day  with  beetle  and  wedges  in  split- 
ting pieces  of  wood  for  erecting  a  fence. 
At  night,  before  going  home,  he  put  the 
beetle  and  wedges  into  the  hollow  of  an 
old  tree,  and  directed  his  sons,  who  had 
been  at  work  in  an  adjoining  field,  to  ac- 
company him  next  morning  to  assist  in 
making  the  fence.  In  the  night  he  be- 
came mnniacai,  and  continued  in  a  state 
of  insanity  for  several  years,  during  wbi<j} 


B.  C.  563.] 


CHAPTER   IV. 


22& 


honoured  him  '■  that  liveth  for  ever, 
\Yhose  dominion  is  an  ^  everhisting 
dominion,  and  his  kingdom  is  from 
geueratiou  'to  generation. 

'c.  12.7;  Ro.  4.  10. 

"Ps.  10.  IG;  Je.  10.  10;  c.  2.44;  7.  14;  Mi. 
4.  7 ;  Lu.  1.  33. 


35  And  ^  all  the  inhabitants  of  the 
earth  are  reputed  as  nolliing:  and 
hei'doeth  according  to  his  will  in 
the  army  of  heaven,  and  among  tho 


« Ps.  90. 1. 

e  Ps.  115. 


"  Is.  40. 15, 16. 
135.  6. 


time  bis  mind  was  not  occupied  with  any 
of  the  subjects  with  which  he  had  been 
conversant  when  in  health.  After  several 
years  his  reason  returned  suddenlj',  and 
the  tirst  question  he  asked  vras,  whether 
his  sons  had  brought  home  the  beetle  and 
wedges.  A  lady  bad  been  intensely  en- 
gaged for  some  time  in  a  piece  of  needle- 
work. Before  she  had  completed  it  she 
became  insane,  and  continued  in  that 
state  for  seven  years,  after  which  her  rea- 
son returned  suddenly.  One  of  the  first 
questions  she  asked  related  to  her  needle- 
work, though  she  had  never  alluded  to 
it,  so  far  as  was  recollected,  during  her 
illness.  Another  lady  was  liable  to  peri- 
odioal  paroxysms  of  delirium,  which  often 
attacked  her  so  suddenly,  that  in  conver- 
eation  she  would  stop  in  the  middle  of  a 
story,  or  even  of  a  sentence,  and  branch 
off  into  the  subject  of  her  hallucination. 
On  the  return  of  her  reason,  she  would 
resume  the  subject  of  her  conversation 
on  which  she  was  engaged  at  the  time  of 
the  attack,  beginning  exactly  where  she 
had  left  off,  though  she  had  never  alhided 
to  it  during  the  delirium;  and  on  the 
nest  attack  of  delirium  she  would  resume 
the  subject  of  hallucination  with  Avhich 
she  had  been  occupied  at  the  conclusion 
of  the  former  paroxysm.  A  similar  thing 
maj'  have  occurred  to  Nebuchadnezzar. 
He  was  deprived  of  reason  by  a  sudden 
voice  from  heaven.  Nothing  was  more 
natural,  or  would  be  more  in  accordance 
with  the  laws  respecting  insanitj',  than 
that  c(t  the  very  -inslant  when  reason  re- 
turned he  should  b)ok  up  to  the  place 
whence  the  voice  had  seemed  to  come. 
^\Aiidiiniie  luirkrstandinr/  returned  unto  inc. 
This  shows  that  he  regarded  hiiviself  as 
having  been  a  maniac,  tliough  doubtlss 
he  was  ignorant  of  the  manner  in  which 
he  had  been  treated.  It  would  seem 
from  the  narrative,  ;ind  from  the  proba- 
bilities of  the  case,  tliat  he  found  himself 
driven  out  from  his  palace,  herding  with 
cattle,  and  in  the  deploralde  condition  in 
regard  to  personal  appearance  which  he 
here  describes.  Seeing  this  in  fact,  and 
20 


recollecting  the  prediction,  he  could  not 
doubt  that  this  was  the  way  in  which  he  had 
been  treated  during  the  period  of  his  dis- 
tressing malady.  •[  And  I  blessed  the  Most 
Hi(jh.  For  his  recovery,  and  in  an  hum- 
ble acknowledgment  of  his  dependence. 
"The  acts  of  praise  here  referred  to,  are 
the  suitable  returns  of  a  mind  truly  peni- 
tent, and  deeply  sensible  of  its  faults  and 
of  its  mercies."  WinMe.  \  And  I  jiraised 
and  honoured  him.  That  is,  I  honoured 
him  by  rendering  thanks  for  his  restoring 
mercy;  by  recognizing  him  as  the  true 
God  ;  and  by  the  acknowledging  of  the 
truth  that  he  has  a  right  to  reign,  and 
that  his  kingdom  is  over  all.  ^  That 
Uveth  forever.  He  is  the  li'viuf/  God,  as 
he  is  often  styled,  in  contradistinction 
from  all  false  gods — who  have  no  life; 
and  he  lives  forever  in  contradistinction 
to  his  creatures  on  earth,  all  of  whom  are 
destined  to  die.  He  will  live  when  all 
on  earth  shall  have  died  ;  he  will  live  for- 
ever in  the  future,  as  he  has  lived  forever 
in  the  past.  ^  T17)ose  dominion  is  an 
everlastinij  dominion.  His  empire  ex- 
tends through  all  time,  and  will  continue 
while  eternal  ages  roll  awaj'.  ^  And  his 
kingdom  is  from  fjeneration  to  generation. 
The  generations  of  men  pass  away.  Ono 
succeeds  another,  and  there  is  no  perma- 
nency. Dynasties  change,  and  monarehs 
die.  No  human  sovereign  can  extend 
his  own  power  over  the  next  generation, 
nor  can  he  secure  his  authority  in  the 
person  of  his  successors.  But  the  do- 
minion of  God  is  unchanged  while  tho 
generations  of  men  pass  away,  and  when 
one  disappears  from  the  earth  he  meets 
the  next  with  the  same  claim  to  the  right 
of  sovereignty ;  with  the  same  princi- 
ples of  government ;  carrying  forward 
ttirough  that  and  successive  ages,  the 
fulfilment  of  his  great  and  glorious  pur- 
poses. 

35.  And  all  the  inhahitanta  of  the  earth 
are  reputed  as  nothing.  Are  regarded  as 
nothing  in  comparison  with  him.  Conip. 
Notes  on  Isa.  xl.  15,  17.  Precisely  the 
same  sentiment  occurs  in  Isaiah  wbich  is 


230 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  563 


inhabitants  of  the  cra'th:  and  none]  36  At  the  same  time  my  reason 
can  stay  "  his  haiiJ,  or  say  unto  him,  j  returned  unto  me  ;  and  for  the 
What  i' doest  thou  ?  i  glorj'  of  my  kingdom,  my  honour 


'  Is.  AZ.  13.       b  Job  9.  12  ;  Is.  4.5.  9  ;  Ko.  9.  20. 

expressed  here:  "All  nations  before  hiin 
are  iis  nothing;  and  they  are  counted 
unto  him  less  than  nothing  and  vanity." 
^  And  he  cloeth  accordiiir/  to  his  trill  in 
the  urmi/  of  henven.  In  the  host  of 
heaven — "?^n3 — Gr.  in  the  power  of  heaven, 
cv  rfi^  ivi'd/iei.  The  Chaldee  word  means 
properly  strength,  might,  valour ;  and  it 
is  then  applied  to  an  arnij'  as  possessing 
strength,  or  valour,  or  force.  It  is  here 
applied  to  the  inhabitants  of  heaven,  pro- 
biiljly,  considered  as  an  army  or  host,  of 
which  God  is  the  head,  and  which  he 
leads  forth  or  marshals  to  execute  his 
purposes.  In  ch.  iii.  20,  the  word  is  ren- 
dered army.  The  sentiment  here  is,  that 
in  respect  to  the  inhabitants  of  heaven, 
represented  as  organized  or  marshalled, 
God  does  his  own  pleasure.  An  intima- 
tion of  his  will  is  all  that  is  needful  to 
control  them.  Thus  sentiment  is  in  ac- 
cordance with  all  the  statements  in  the 
Scripture,  and  is  a  point  of  theology 
which  must  enter  into  every  just  view 
of  God.  Thus  in  the  Lord's  prayer  it 
is  implied  :  "  Thy  will  be  done  in  earth 
as  it  is  in  heaven."  So  Ei)h.  i.  11 — 
"AVho  worketh  all  things  after  the  coun- 
sel of  his  own  will."  In  heaven  the  will 
of  (iod  is  accomplished  in  the  most  strict 
and  absolute  sense,  for  his  will  is  law,  and 
the  only  law,  to  all  the  dwellers  there. 
The  obedience  is  as  entire  as  if  the  will 
of  each  one  of  the  dwellers  there  were  but 
a  form  or  manifestation  of  the  will  of 
God  itself.  IT  And  among  the  inhabitants 
of  the  earth.  This  cannot  mean,  even  as 
understood  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  that  the 
will  of  God  is  actually  done  among  the 
inhabitants  of  the  earth  in  the  same  sense, 
and  to  the  same  e.xtent,  as  among  those 
who  dwell  in  heaven.  His  design  was, 
undoubtedlj',  to  assert  the  supremacy  and 
absolute  control  of  God;  a  fact  that  had 
been  so  strikingly  illustrated  in  his  own 
case.  The  sentiment  expressed  by  Ne- 
buchadnezzar is  true  in  the  following 
respects:  (1)  That  man  has  no  power  to 
prevent  the  fulfilment  of  the  divine  pur- 
poses. (2)  That  God  will  accomplish  his 
design  in  all  things,  whatever  opposition 
man  may  make.  (3)  That  he  has  abso- 
Vte   control   over  every  human   being; 


and  brightness  returned  unto  me 


and  over  all  that  pertains  to  any  one  and 
every  one.  (4)  That  he  will  overrule  all 
things  so  as  to  make  them  subservient  to 
his  own  plans.  (5)  That  he  will  make 
use  of  men  to  accomplish  his  own  pur- 
poses. Comp.  Notes  on  Isa.x.  7.  (0)  That 
there  is  a  great  and  glorious  scheme  of 
administration  which  God  is  carrj'ing 
out  by  the  instrumentality  of  men.  *[  And 
none  can  stai/  his  hand.  Literally,  '  none 
can  smite  upon  his  hand'  {Geseniiis  Lex.) ; 
that  is,  none  can  restrain  his  iiand.  The 
language  is  taken,  says  Bertholdt,  from 
the  custom  of  striking  children  upon  the 
hand  when  about  to  do  anything  wrong, 
in  order  to  restrain  them.  The  phrase 
is  common  in  the  Targuns  for  to  restrain, 
to  hinder.  The  Arabs  have  a  similar  ex- 
pression in  common  use.  See  numerous 
instances  of  the  use  of  the  word  n.;;^d  in  the 
sense  of  restrain,  or  prohibit,  in  Bustorf. 
Lex.  Chal.  The  truth  taught  here  is, 
that  no  one  has  power  to  keep  back  the 
hand  of  God  when  it  is  put  forth  to  ac- 
complish the  purposes  which  he  intends 
to  execute;  that  is,  he  will  certainly  ac- 
complish his  own  pleasure.  «  Or  say 
vnto  him,  What  doest  tliun  ?  A  similar 
expression  occurs  in  2  Sam.  xvi.  10: 
"  So  let  him  curse,  because  the  Lord  hath 
said  unto  him.  Curse  David.  AVho  shall 
then  say,  Wherefore  hast  thou  done  so?" 
Also  in  Job  ix.  12 :  "  Behold,  he  taketi. 
away,  who  can  hinder  him?  Who  will 
say  unto  him,  AVhat  doest  thou?"  See 
Notes  on  that  passage.  The  meaning 
here  is  plain.  God  is  supreme,  and  will 
do  his  pleasure  in  heaven  and  in  earth. 
The  security  that  all  will  be  done  right  is 
founded  on  the  perfection  of  his  nature; 
and  that  is  ample.  Mysterious  though 
his  ways  may  seem  to  us,  yet  in  that 
perfection  of  his  nature  we  have  the 
iuUest  assurance  that  no  wrong  will  be 
done  to  any  of  his  creatures.  Our  duty, 
therefore,  is  calm  submission  to  his  holy 
will,  with  the  deep  conviction  that 
whatever  God  does  will  yet  be  seen  to  be 
right. 

36.  At  the  same  time  my  reason  returned 
unto  me.  Showing  that  he  regarded  him- 
self as  having  been  insane.  ^  And  for 
the  (jlory    of  my  kingdom.     That  is,  hif 


3.  C.  503.] 


CHAPTER    IV. 


231 


and  nij- counsellors  and  my  lords  I  and  extol  and  honour  the  King  of 
souglit  unto  me;  and  I  Avas  cstab-  heaven,  all  whose -works  ^  ai-e  truth, 
lislied   in  my  kingdom,  and   excel-  and  his*  ways  judgment :  and  those 


lent  mnjcsty  was  added  *unto  me. 
37  Now  I  Nebuchadnezzar  jiraise 

<Job42.12.        I'De.oi.'l;  Ps.SO.4;  Ee.15.3. 

restoration  to  the  exercise  of  his  renson 
contributed  to  the  gh)ry  of  his  kingdom, 
either  l>y  the  acts  of  justice  and  henefi- 
conee  uliich  he  intended  sliould  charac- 
terize the  remainder  of  his  reign,  or  by 
his  purpose  to  reform  the  abuses  which 
had  crept  into  the  government  while  he 
Teas  deprived  of  his  renson,  or  by  his  de- 
termination to  complete  public  works 
which  had  been  purposed  or  commenced 
before  his  affliction.  •]  Mi/  honinir  and 
hrif/litncss  returned  unto  vie.  Evidently 
referring  to  his  intellect.  lie  was  again 
restored  to  that  strength  and  clearness 
of  understanding  by  which,  before  his 
affliction,  he  had  been  able  to  do  so  much 
fur  the  glory  of  his  kingdom.  ^  And  mij 
counsellors  and  iin/  lords  soufjht  niito  me. 
As  they  bad  done  formerly.  During  his 
state  of  mental  alienation,  of  course,  the 
great  lords  of  the  empire  would  not  resort 
to  him  for  counsel.  ^  And  excellent  ma- 
jesty was  added  nnto  me.  Majesty  and 
honour  appropriate  to  my  state,  instead 
of  the  treatment  incident  to  the  condition 
of  a  maniac.  Theodotion  renders  this, 
'  and  greater  majesty  was  added  to  me.' 
It  is  by  no  means  improbable  that  addi- 
tional honour  would  be  conferred  on  the 
recovered  monarch. 

37.  Noio  I  Nebuchadnezzar  praise  and 
extol  and  honour  the  Kinr/  of  heaven. 
Comp.  ch.  ii.  47,  and  vs.  1 — 3  of  this 
chapter.  He  felt  himself  called  on,  in  this 
public  manner,  to  acknowledge  the  true 
God,  with  whose  supremacy  he  had  been 
made  acquainted  in  so  afi'ecting  a  man- 
ner ;  to  praise  him  that  he  had  pre- 
served him,  and  restored  him  to  his  rea- 
son and  his  throne;  to  extol  or  exalt 
him,  by  recognizing  his  sovereignty  over 
the  mighty  kings  of  the  earth,  and  the 
power  to  rule  over  all ;  and  to  honour 
him  by  making  his  name  and  attributes 
known  abroad,  and  liy  using  all  his  in- 
fluence as  a  monarch  to  have  him  rever- 
enced throughout  his  extended  empire. 
^i  All  irhose  works  are  truth.  See  Deut. 
xxxii.  4;  Ps.  xxxiii.  4  ;  Rev.  xv.  3.  The 
meaning  is,  that  all  that  he  does  is  done 


that  walk  in   pride  <"  he  is  able  to 
abase. 

c  Ex.  IS.  11 ;  Job  40. 11, 12 ;  c.  5.  20. 


in  accordance  with  the  true  nature  of 
things,  or  with  justice  and  propriety. 
It  is  not  based  on  a  false  estimate  of 
things,  as  what  is  done  by  man  often  is. 
How  often  are  the  plans  and  acts  of  man, 
even  where  there  are  the  best  intentions, 
based  on  some  false  estimate  of  things; 
on  some  views  which  are  shown  by  the 
result  to  have  been  erroneous  !  liut  God 
sees  things  precisely  as  they  are,  and 
accurately  knows  what  shouhi  be  done  in  ' 
every  case.  %  And  those  that  iralk  in 
2)ride  he  is  able  to  abase.  What  had  oc- 
curred to  Nebuchadnezzar  might  occur  to 
others,  and  as  God  had  shown  that  he 
could  reduce  the  mostexalted  sovereign  of 
the  earth  to  the  lowest  condition  in  which 
a,  human  being  can  be,  he  inferred  that 
he  could  do  the  same  thing  to  all,  and 
that  there  was  no  one  so  exalted  in  rank, 
so  vigorous  in  health,  and  so  mighty  in 
intellect,  that  he  could  not  effectually  hum- 
ble and  subdue  him.  This  is  indeed  an 
affecting  truth  which  is  constantly  illus- 
trated in  the  world.  The  reverses  oc- 
curring among  men,  the  sick  bed,  the 
loss  of  reason,  the  grave,  show  how  easily 
God  can  bring  down  rank,  and  beauty, 
and  talent,  and  all  that  the  world  calls 
great,  to  the  dust. 

In  the  Greek  Codex  Chis.  there  is  at 
the  close  of  this  chapter  a  beautiful 
ascription  of  praise  to  God,  which  has  no- 
thing to  correspond  with  it  in  the  Chaldee, 
and  the  origin  of  which  is  unknown. 
I  will  translate  it,  because,  although  it  is 
not  of  divine  authoritj%  and  is  no  part 
of  the  sacred  writings,  it  contains  senti- 
ments not  inappropriate  to  the  close  of 
this  remarkable  chapter.  It  is  as  follows  : 
'To  the  Most  High  I  make  confession, 
and  render  praise  to  him  who  made  the 
heaven,  and  the  earth,  and  the  seas,  and 
the  rivers,  and  all  things  in  them  ;  I  ac- 
knowledge him  and  praise  him  because 
he  is  the  God  of  Gods,  and  Lord  of  Lords, 
and  King  of  Kings,  for  he  does  signs  and 
wonders,  and  changes  times  and  seasons, 
taking  away  the  kingdoms  of  kings,  and 
placing  others  in  their  stead.     From  this 


232 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  56i 


time  I  will  serve  liiin,  nnd  from  the  fear 
of  him  trcDililing  h;is  seized  me,  and  I 
priiise  ;ill  his  suinfs  ;  for  the  gods  ot  the 
heatlien  have  not  in  theni.^elves  power  to 
transfer  the  kingdom  of  a  king  to  nn- 
otticr  king,  and  to  kill,  and  to  make  alive, 
and  to  do  signs,  and  great  and  fearful 
wonders,  and  to  change  mighty  deeds, 
as  the  God  of  heaven  has  done  to  me,  and 
h'is  brought  upon  me  great  changes.  I, 
during  all  the  days  of  my  reign,  on  ac- 
count of  my  life,  will  bring  to  the  Most 
High  saerilices  for  an  odor  of  sweet 
savor  to  the  Lord,  and  I  and  my  people 
will  do  that  which  will  be  acceptable  be- 
fore him— my  nation,  and  the  countries 
which  are  under  my  power.  And  who- 
soever shall  speak  against  the  God  of 
heaven,  and  whosoever  shall  countenrince 
those  who  speak  anything,  I  will  condemn 
to  death.  Praise  the  Lord  God  of  hea- 
ven, and  bring  sacrifice  and  offering  to 
him  gloriously.  I,  King  of  Kings,  confess 
him  gloriously,  for  so  he  has  done  with 
me  ;  in  the  very  day  he  set  me  upon  my 
throne,  and  mj'  power,  and  my  kingdom  ; 
among  my  people  I  have  power,  and  my 
majesty  has  been  restored  to  me.  And 
he  sent  letters  concerning  all  things  that 
were  done  unto  him  in  his  kingdom,  to 
all  the  nations  that  were  under  him.' 

Nebuchadnezzar  is  supposed  to  have 
lived  but  about  one  year  after  this  (  Win- 
Ide),  but  nothing  is  known  of  his  subse- 
quent deeds.  It  ma}'  be  hoped  that  he 
continued  steadfast  in  liis  faith  in  that 
God  whom  he  liad  thus  been  brought  to 


I  acknowledge,  and  that  he  died  in   that 
belief.     But   of   this    nothing  is    known, 
I  After  so  solemn  an   admonition,  ho\vcver, 
j  of  his  own  pride,  and  after  being  brought 
j  in  this  public  manner  to  acknowledge  the 
true  Goil,  it  is  to  be  regarded  as  not  im- 
probable that  he  looked  on  the  Babylon 
I  that  he  had  reared,  and  over  his  extended 
j  realms,    with    other  feelings    than    those* 
which    he   had   before   this   terrible  cala- 
j  mity  came  upon  him.     "Nebuchadnezzar 
'  was  succeeded  in  his  kingdom  by  his  son 
Iloarudam,  according  to  Ptoleni}',  who  is 
I  the  Evil  Merodach  of  Jeremiah,  who  mar- 
'ried  a  discreet  and  prudent  woman  called 
Nitocris,  from  whom  was  born  a  son,  whose 
history  is  the  subject  of  the  next  chapter. 
After  the  death   of  Evil  Merodadi,  who 
reigned  two  years,  Niricassolassar.  or  Ne- 
riglissar,  who  seems  to  have  been  the  chief 
of  the   conspirators  against  the  last  king, 
succeeded  him.    He  had  married  a  daugh- 
ter of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  in  the  course 
of  his  reign  made  a  great  stand  against  the 
growing  power  of    the  Medcs  and  Per- 
sians ;  but  at  length,  after  a  reign  of  four 
j-ears,  was  killed  in  a  battle  with  them  un- 
der the  command  of  Cyrus.  His  son  Labo- 
rosoarchod   succeeded    him,    and    having 
reigned  onlj'  nine  months,  and  not  reach- 
ing a  Thoth,  or  beginning  of  an  Egyptian 
year,  he  is  not  mentioned  by  Ptolenjy,  but 
he  is  said  to  have  been  quite  the  reverse 
of  his  father,  and  to  have  exercised  many 
acts  of  wanton  cruelty,  and  was  murdered 
by  his  own  subjects,  and  succeeded  by  his 
son  Kabonadius,  or  lielsbazzar."    ^^'inkl€, 


(1)  The  narrative  in  this  chapter  furnishes  an  illustration  of  the  dispofition  among  men  to 
make  arranjzi'mcnts  for  their  own  ease  and  comfort,  cspcciall3'  in  view  of  ndvaneing  years,  vor.  4. 
Kehuchadnezzar  had  drawn  around  him  all  that  it  is  pcsfible,  perhaps,  for  man  to  accumulate 
with  this  view.  He  was  at  the  head  of  the  heathen  world — the  Hiighty  monarch  of  the  mightiest 
kingdom  on  the  earth.  He  was  at  peace — having  finished  liis  wars,  and  having  teen  satiated 
with  the  glorj'  of  battle  and  conquest.  He  had  enlarged  and  leautif  ed  his  capital,  so  that  it 
was  one  of  tlie  'wonders  of  the  world.'  He  had  built  for  hinis^elf  a  palace,  which  surpassed  in 
richnes.o.  and  elegance,  and  luxury,  all  the  habitations  cf  man  in  that  age.  He  hud  accumulated 
vast  wealth,  and  there  was  not  a  production  of  any  clime  which  he  could  cot  command,  nor  was 
there  anything  that  is  supposed  to  be  necessary  to  make  man  happy  in  this  life  wliich  he  had 
not  in  his  possession.  All  this  was  the  result  of  arrangement  and  purpose.  He  had  ciefiijned  evi- 
dently to  reach  the  point  where  he  might,  feel  that  lie  was  '  at  ease,  and  fiOun>liing  in  his  palace.' 

What  was  true  in  his  case  on  a  large  scale,  is  true  of  others  in  general,  though  on  a  much 
smaller  scale.  Most  men  would  be  glad  to  do  the  same  thing ;  and  most  men  seek  to  niiike  such 
an  arrangement  according  to  their  ability.  They  look  to  the  time  when  they  may  retire  from 
the  toils  and  cares  of  life,  with  a  competence  for  their  old  age,  and  that  they  may  enjoy  life,  |  cr- 
haps,  many  jears,  in  the  tranquillity  of  honourable  and  happy  retirement.  Tlie  merchant  iloeg 
not  expect  always  to  be  a  merchant;  the  man  in  office  to  be  always  hurdencil  with  the  cares 
nf  state.  The  soldier  does  not  expect  always  to  be  in  the  camp,  or  tlie  marines  on  the  sea.  The 
Warrior  hopes  to  repose  on  his  laurels;  the  sailor  to  find  a  quiet  haven;  llie  merchant  to  have 
i&ougb  to  be  permitted  to  sit  down  in  the  evening  of  life  free  from  care;  and  the  lawyer,  tb« 


B.  C,  563.J  C  II A  P  T  E  R    I  V  .  23b 

pliysician,  the  clergyman,  the  fiirtner,  each  one  hopes,  after  the  toils  and  tonflicts  of  life  are  over 
to  be  permitted  to  sjiend  the  remainder  of  his  days  in  comfort,  if  not  in  altlucuce. 

This  seems  to  be  based  on  some  law  of  our  nature;  and  it  is  not  to  be  spoken  of  harshly,  or 
Ues)iised  us  if  it  had  no  foundation  in  that  which  is  great  and  noble  in  our  beinj;.  I  see  in  this 
a  high  and  noble  truth.  It  is  that  our  nature  looks  forward  to  rest ;  that  we  are  so  mauo  us 
to  pant  for  7-cpose:  to  calm  I'epose  when  the  work  of  life  is  over.  As  our  Maker  formed  us,  tho 
law  was  that  we  should  seek  this  in  tlie  world  to  come — in  tliat  blessed  abode  where  we  Hmy  no 
free  from  all  care,  and  where  there  shall  bo  everlasting  rest.  But  man,  naturally  unwilling  to 
look  lo  that  world,  has  abused  this  law  of  his  being,  and  seeks  to  find  the  rest  for  whicli  the 
snnl  pants,  in  that  interval,  usually  veri/  short,  and  quite  unfitted  for  tranquil  enjoyment,  be- 
tween the  period  when  he  toils,  and  lies  down  in  the  gi'avc.  The  true  law  of  his  being  would 
lead  him  to  look  onward  to  everlasting  happiness  ;  he  abuses  and  perverts  the  law,  and  seeks  to 
satisfy  it  by  making  provision  for  a  brief  and  temporary  rest  at  the  close  of  the  present  life. 

(2)  There  is  ;i  process  often  going  on  in  the  case  of  these  individuals  to  dislurli  or 2)fefent  that 
stiUe  of  ease.  Thus  there  was  in  the  case  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  as  intimated  by  the  drmim. 
Kven  then,  in  his  highest  state  of  grandeur,  tliere  was  a  tendency  to  the  sad  result  which  fol- 
lowetl  when  he  was  driven  from  liis  throne,  and  treated  as  a  poor  and  neglected  maniac.  This 
was  intimated  to  liim  by  the  dream ;  and  to  one  who  could  see  all  the  future,  it  would  bo 
apparent  that  things  were  tending  to  this  result.  The  very  excitements  and  agitations  of  his 
life;  tlie  intoxication  of  his  pride;  and  the  circumstances  of  ease  and  grandeur  in  which  he 
was  now  pl.aced,  all  tendefl  by  a  natural  course  of  things  to  (iroduce  wliat  followed. 

And  so,  in  other  cases,  there  is  often  a  process  going  on.  if  it  could  be  seen,  destined  to  disap- 
point all  those  hopes,  and  to  prevent  all  that  anticipated  ease  and  tranquillity.  It  is  not  always 
visible  to  men,  but  could  we  see  things  as  God  sees  them,  we  should  perceive  that  there  are 
causes  at  work  which  will  blast  all  those  hopes  of  ease,  and  disappoint  all  tho.«e  expectations  of 
tranquillity.  There  ma-i/  be  (a)  the  loss  of  all  that  we  possess  :  for  we  hold  it  by  an  uncertain 
tenure,  and  "  riches  often  take  to  themselves  wings."  There  may  lie  (I))  the  loss  of  a  wife,  or  a 
child — and  all  our  anticipated  comforts  shall  be  tasteless,  for  there  shall  be  none  with  whom 
to  share  them.  There  may  be  (c)  the  loss  of  reason,  as  in  the  case  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  for  no 
human  precaution  can  guard  against  that.  There  may  be  (d)  the  loss  of  health — a  loss  against 
which  no  one  can  defend  hunself — which  sh.all  render  all  his  preparations  for  comfort  of  no 
value.  Or  (e )  death  itself  may  come — for  no  one  lias  any  basis  of  calculation  in  regard  to  his  own 
life,  and  no  one.  therefore,  who  builds  for  himself  a  palace  can  have  any  security  that  he  will 
ever  enjoy  it.  Men  who  build  splendid  houses  for  themselves  may  yet  experience  sad  scenes 
in  their  dwellings,  and  if  they  could  foresee  all  that  will  occur  in  them,  it  would  so  throw  a 
gloom  over  all  the  future  as  to  lead  them  to  abandon  the  undertaking.  Who  could  engage 
cheerfully  in  sunh  an  enterprise  if  ho  saw  that  he  was  constructing  a  house  in  which  a  daugh- 
ter was  to  lie  down  and  die,  or  from  which  his  wife  and  children  were  soon  to  be  borne  forth  to 
the  grave?  In  this  chamber,  your  child  may  be  long  sick  ;  in  that  one,  you  or  your  wife  may 
lie  down  on  a  bed  from  which  you  will  never  rise;  from  those  doors  yourself,  your  wife,  your 
child,  will  be  borne  forth  to  the  grave ;  and  if  you  sinw  all  this  now,  how  could  you  engage  with 
so  much  zeal  in  constructing  your  magnificent  habitation  ? 

(3)  Our  plans  of  life  should  be  formed  with  the  feeling  that  this  is  possible.  I  say  not  with 
the  gloomy  apprehension  that  these  calamities  will  certainly  come,  or  with  no  anticipation  or 
hope  that  there  will  be  different  scenes — for  then  life  «ouId  le  nothing  else  but  gloom,  but  that 
we  should  allow  the  jMssiliility  that  these  things  may  occur  to  enter,  as  nn  element,  into  oup 
calculations  respecting  the  future.  Such  a  feeling  will  give  ussober  and  just  views  of  life;  will 
break  thcs  force  of  trouble  and  disappointment  when  they  come;  and  will  give  us  just  appre- 
hensions of  our  dependence  on  Him  in  whose  hand  are  all  our  comforts. 

(4)  The  dealings  of  God  in  our  world  are  such  as  arc  eminently  fitted  to  keep  up  the  recogni- 
tion of  these  truths  What  occuiTcd  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  the  humbling  of  his  pride,  and  tho 
blighting  of  his  anticipated  pleasures,  is  just  an  illustration  of  what  is  constantly  occurring  on 
the  e.arth.  What  house  is  there  into  which  trouble,  disappointment,  and  sorrow  never  come? 
What  scheme  of  pride  is  there  in  respect  to  which  something  dors  not  occur  to  produce  mortifica- 
tion? What  habitation  is  there  into  which  sicknc;ss,  bereavement,  and  death  never  find  their 
way?  And  what  abode  of  man  on  earth  can  be  made  secure  from  the  intrusion  of  these  things? 
The  mast  splendid  mansion  must  soon  be  left  by  its  owner,  and  never  be  visited  by  him  again. 
The  most  magnificent  banqueting  hall  will  be  forsaken  by  its  possessor,  and  neverwill  lie  return 
to  it  agiin;  never  go  into  the  chamber  where  he  sought  repose;  never  sit  down  at  the  table 
where  he  joined  with  others  in  revelry, 

(■;)  Thecounsel  given  by  Daniel  to  Nebuchadnezzar  (ver.  27),  to  break  off  his  sins  by  righteous- 
ness, that  there  might  be  a  lengthening  out  of  his  tranquillity,  is  counsel  that  may  now  be  given 
to  all  sinners,  with  equal  propriety,  For  (I.)  as  in  his  case,  there  are  certain  consetiuences  of 
sin  to  which  we  must  look  forward,  and  on  which  the  eye  of  a  sinner  should  rest.  Those  con- 
sequences are  (1)  such  as  spring  up  in  the  course  of  nature,  or  which  are  the  regular  results 
of  sin  in  the  course  of  events.  They  are  such  as  can  be  foreseen,  and  can  be  made  tlie  basis 
of  calculation,  or  which  a  man  can  know  beforehand  will  come  upon  him  if  he  per.severes  in 
a  certain  course.  Thus  lie  wb.o  is  intemperate,  can  look  upon  certain  results  which  will  in- 
evitably follow  if  he  perseveres  in  that  cour.-c  of  life.  As  he  looks  upon  the  poverty,  and  bab- 
bling, and  woe,  and  sorrow,  and  misery,  .and  death  of  an  inebriate,  he  can  see  that  that  lot  will 
be  certainly  his  own  if  he  perseveres  in  Iiis  present  course,  and  this  can  be  made  with  him  a 
matter  of  definite  calculation  or  anticipation.  Or  (2)  there  are  all  those  consequences  of  siu 
20* 


234  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  5GS 

V7luih  are  made  known  in  the  sacred  Scriptures  assure  to  come  upon  transgressors.  This,  toi,,  is  a 
lavite  class;  but  these  consequences  are  as  ccrtniH  as  those  which  occur  in  the  regular  course 
of  events.  The  principal  tlillerence  between  the  two  is,  that  revelation  has  desipinatiil  mere  sins 
that  will  involve  the  sinner  in  calamity  than  can  he  ascertained  in  tlie  ordinary  course  of 
events,  and  that  it  has  carried  the  mind  forward,  and  discloses  what  will  taUe  place  in  the 
future  world  as  well  as  what  will  occur  in  this.  But  the  one  is  no  more  certain  than  the  other : 
and  alike  in  reference  to  what  is  iure  to  occur  in  tlie  present  lUi',  and  what  we  are  UM  will 
occur  in  the  future  state,  the  sinner  sliould  allow  him.eelf  to  be  influenced  hy  the  anticipation 
of  what  is  to  come.  (II.)  Itepentance,  reformation,  and  a  holy  life  would,  in  many  ca.ses,  go 
far  to  arrest  these  calamities — or.  in  the  lan!;-uage  of  Daniel,  'lengthen  out  tranquillity.'  This 
is  true  in  the  following  respects:  fl)  That  impending  <('?H^)ora7  calamities  may  be  often  partially 
or  wholly  turned  aw.iy  by  reformation.  An  illustration  of  this  thought  occurred  in  the  case 
of  Nineveh  ;  and  the  same  thing  now  occurs.  A  young  man  who  is  in  dangerof  becoming  intem- 
perate, and  who  has  already  contracted  some  of  the  habits  that  lead  to  intemperance,  could 
avert  a  large  class  of  impending  ills  by  so  simple  a  thing  as  signing  the  temperance  pledge,  and 
adhering  to  it.  All  the  evils  of  povertj',  tears,  crime,  disease,  and  an  early  death,  that  int(m- 
pevance  produce.',  he  would  cerlainhj  avert;  that  is,  he  would  make  it  certain  that  the  large 
class  of  ills  that  intemperance  engenders  would  ??c-i-er  come  upon  him.  He  might  experience 
ntlter  ills,  but  he  would  never  sutler  those.  [*o  it  is  of  the  srufTerings  produced  hy  licentiousness, 
by  gluttony,  hy  the  spirit  of  rtvcnge;  and  so  it  is  of  all  the  woes  that  follow  the  violation  of 
human  laws.  A  man  may  indeed  be  poor;  he  may  be  sick;  he  may  be  bereaved  ;  he  may  lose 
his  reason,  lait  iheic  ills  he  will  never  experience.  15ut  what  Daniel  here  aftirms  is  true  in 
another  sense  in  regard  to  temporal  calamities.  A  man  may,  by  repentance,  and  by  breaking 
off  from  his  sins,  do  much  to  stay  the  progress  of  woe,  and  to  avert  tlie  results  whicli  lie  had 
dready  begun  to  experience.  Thus  the  drunkard  may  reform,  and  may  have  restored  health, 
vigour,  and  prosperity;  and  thus  the  licentious  may  turn  from  the  evil  of  his  ways,  and  enjoy 
health  and  happiness  still.  On  this  subject,  see  Kotes  on  Job  xxxiii.  14 — 25,  particularly  the 
Notes  on  ver.  25.  But  (2)  by  repentance  and  holy  living  a  man  may  turn  away  all  the  results 
of  sin  in  the  future  world,  and  may  make  it  certain  that  he  will  never  experience  a  pang  be- 
yond the  grave.  All  the  woe  that  sin  would  cause  in  the  future  state  may  be  thus  averted, 
and  lie  who  has  been  deeply  guilty  may  enter  the  eternal  world  with  the  assurance  that 
he  will  never  suffer  beyond  the  grave.  AVliether,  then,  we  look  to  the  future  in  the  pro- 
sent  life,  or  to  the  future  beyond  the  grave,  we  have  the  highest  conceivable  motives  to 
abandon  the  ways  of  .sin,  and  to  lead  lives  of  holiness.  If  a  man  were  to  live  only  on  the  earth , 
it  would  lie  for  his  welfare  to  break  off  from  tfie  ways  of  transgression ;  how  much  higher  is 
this  motive  when  it  is  remembered  that  he  must  exist  forever! 

(d)  We  have  an  illustration  in  the  account  in  this  chapter  of  the  evil  of  pride,  vs.  29,  30,  31.  Tho 
pride  which  we  may  have  on  account  of  beauty,  or  strength,  or  learning,  or  accompli-shments; 
which  we  feel  when  we  look  over  our  lands  that  we  have  cultivated,  or  the  houses  that  we  have 
built,  or  the  reputation  which  we  have  acquired,  is  no  less  offensive  in  the  siglit  of  a  holy  God 
than  was  the  pride  of  the  magnificent  monarcli  who  looked  out  on  the  towers,  and  domes,  and 
walls,  and  palaces,  of  a  vast  city,  and  said — 'Is  not  this  great  Bal'ylon  that  I  have  builded.' 

(7)  And  in  view  of  the  calamity  that  came  upon  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  the  treatment  which 
he  received  in  liis  maladj",  we  make  the  following  remarks  :  (a)  \Ve  should  be  thankful  for  the 
continuance  of  reason.  AVlien  we  look  on  sucli  a  case  as  this,  or  when  we  go  into  a  lunatic 
a.'^j'lum,  and  see  the  wretchedness  that  the  lo.ss  of  reason  cau.'^es,  we  should  thank  God  daily 
that  we  are  not  deprived  of  tliis  inestimable  blessing.  0)  We  .should  be  thankful  for  science, 
and  for  the  Christian  religion,  and  for  all  that  they  have  done  to  give  comfort  to  the  maniac, 
or  to  restore  him  to  a  sound  mind.  AVhen  we  compare  the  treatment  which  the  insane  now  re- 
ceive in  the  lunatic  asylums  with  that  which  tliey  everywhere  meet  witli  in  the  heathen  woild, 
and  with  tliat  which  they  have,  up  to  a  very  recent  period,  received  in  Christian  lands,  there 
is  almost  notliing  in  wliich  we  see  more  marked  proof  of  tlie  interposition  of  God,  than  in  the 
great  change  wliich  lias  been  produced.  Them  are  few  persons  wlio  have  not,  or  may  not 
have,  some  friend  or  relative  who  is  insane,  and  there  is  no  one  who  is  not,  or  may  not  be, 
personally  interested  in  tlie  improvement  which  religion  and  science  have  made  in  the  treat- 
ment of  this  class  of  unfortunate  beings.  In  no  one  thing,  so  far  as  1  know,  has  tliere  been 
so  decided  progress  in  the  views  and  conduct  of  men;  and  on  no  one  subject  has  there  been 
BO  evident  an  improvement  in  modern  times,  as  in  the  treatment  of  the  insane,  (c)  The 
possibility  of  the  loss  of  reason  should  he  an  element  in  our  calculations  about  the  future. 
On  this  point  we  can  liave  no  security.  There  is  no  such  vigour  of  intellect,  or  clearness 
of  minu,  or  cultivation  of  the  habits  of  virtue,  and  even  no  such  influence  of  religion,  as  to 
make  it  certain  that  K'e  may  not  yet  be  reckoned  among  the  insane  ;  and  the  pussiliiltly  that 
this  may  be  .so,  should  be  admitted  as  an  element  in  our  calculations  in  regard  to  the  future. 
AVe  .should  not  jeoj'ard  any  v.aluable  interest  by  leaving  that  undone  which  ought  to  be  done, 
on  the  suiiposition  that  we  may  at  a  future  period  of  life  enjoy  the  exercise  of  reason.  Let  us 
remember  that  there  may  be  in  our  case,  even  in  youth  or  middle  life,  the  lo.ss  of  this  faculty; 
that  there  will  be.  if  we  reach  old  age,  in  all  probability,  sudi  a  weakening  of  our  mental 
powers  as  to  unfit  us  for  making  any  preparation  for  the  life  to  come,  and  that  on  tlie  bed  ol 
death,  wlievever  that  occurs,  there  is  often  an  entire  loss  of  the  mental  powers,  and  commonly 
so  much  pain,  distress,  or  prostration,  as  to  unfit  the  dying  man  for  calm  and  deliberate 
thought,  and  let  us,  therefore,  while  we  have  reason  and  health,  do  iill  that  we  know  we  ought 
to  do  to  make  preparation  for  our  eternal  state.  For  what  is  our  reason  more  certainly  given 
\M,  than  to  prepare  for  another  world  1 


B.C.  538.1  CHAPTER   V  233 

CHAPTER  Y. 

I  1.  AUTUENTICITV   OF   THE   CHAPTER. 

Jlcrn  fewrr  olijections  liave  been  made  to  tlio  authenticity  of  tbis  chapter,  and  much  fewer 
difficulties  ftarti  d,  tliau  iu  regard  to  chapter  iv.  'ihosc  which  have  been  urged  may  bo  classed 
under  the  following  heads  : 

I.  'Jhe  first  is  sulstantially  stated  in  this  manner  by  Ecrtholdt.  that  'Daniel  is  represented 
as  speaking  to  the  kin^;  iu  such  a  tone,  that  if  it  had  actually  occurred  he  would  have  been  cut 
to  pieces  by  an  arbitrary  Babylonian  despot:  but  instead  of  that,  he  is  not  only  unpunished, 
but  is  suffered  to  announce  to  the  kin;:  the  certain  destruction  of  his  kingdom  by  the  Medes  and 
Persians;  and  not  only  this,  but  he  is  immediately  promoted  to  he  a  minister  or  officer  of  a 
state  of  exalted  rank.'  p.  345. 

To  this  it  may  be  replied,  (1)  That  the  way  in  which  Daniel  addressed  him  was  entirely  in 
accordance  with  the  manner  in  which  he  addressed  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  which  Nathan  addressed 
David,  in  which  Isaiah  addressed  Ahaz,  and  Jeremiah  the  kings  in  his  time.  (2)  Lelshazzar 
was  overpowered  with  the  remarkable  vision  of  the  handwriting  on  the  wall ;  his  conscience 
smote  him,  and  he  was  in  deep  alarm.  lie  sought  the  meaning  of  this  extraordinary  revelar 
tion.  and  could  not  but  regard  it  as  a  communication  from  heaven.  In  this  state  of  mind,  pain- 
ful as  was  the  announcement,  he  would  naturally  receive  it  as  a  divine  communication,  and 
he  might  fear  to  treat  with  indignity  one  who  shewed  that  he  had  the  power  of  disclosing  the 
meaning  of  words  so  mysterious.  (3)  It  was  in  accordance  with  the  custom  of  those  times  to 
hoi, our  those  who  showed  that  they  had  the  power  of  penetrating  the  divine  mysteries,  and  of 
disclosing  the  meaning  of  dreams,  prodigies,  and  omens.  (4)  It  is  not  impossible,  as  Heng- 
sti'uberg  (Autheutie  des  Dan.  12u)  suggests,  that,  smitten  with  the  consciousness  of  guilt,  and 
knowing  that  he  deserved  punishment,  he  may  have  hoped  to  turn  away  the  wrath  of  God 
by  some  act  cf  piety ;  and  that  he  resolved,  therefore,  to  honour  Daniel,  who  showed  that  he  was 
a  f.ivourite  of  heaven.  The  main  security  of  Daniel,  however,  in  these  bold  and  fearful  an- 
nouncements, was  undoubtedly  to  be  found  in  thii  smitten  conscience  of  the  trembling  monarch, 
and  in  the  belief  that  he  was  a  favourite  of  heaven. 

II.  The  improbability  that  all  this  should  occur  in  one  night — that  so  many  scenes  should 
have  beea  crowded  into  so  short  a  time — embracing  the  feast,  the  writing,  the  calling  iu  of 

he  magicians,  the  investing  of  Daniel  w  ith  bis  new  office,  the  taking  of  the  city,  &c.  '  V  by,'  says 
iertholdt,  'was  not  the  proclamation  in  regard  to  the  new  minister  deferred  to  the  following 
lay  ?  Why  did  all  this  occur  in  the  midst  of  the  scenes  of  revelry  which  were  then  taking- 
place  V  pp.  345,  340. 

To  this  it  may  be  replied,  (1)  That  there  is,  indeed,  every  appearance  of  haste  and  confusion 
in  the  transactions.  This  was  natural,  liut  there  was  assuredly  no  ■Kant  of  time  to  accomplish 
all  that  it  is  said  was  accomplished.  If  it  was  true  that  Cyrus  broke  into  the  city  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  night,  or  if,  as  historians  say  was  the  fact,  he  had  entered  the  city,  and  made  cou- 
sidernble  pro:iress  in  it  before  the  tidings  were  communicated  to  Delshazzar,  there  is  no  impro- 
bability in  supposing  that  all  that  is  said  of  the  feast,  and  of  the  hand-writing,  and  of  the  calling 
in  of  the  magicians,  and  of  their  failure  to  deeypher  the  meaning  of  the  writing,  and  of  the 
summoning  of  Daniel,  and  of  the  interpretation  which  he  gave,  actually  occurred,  for  there  was 
time  enough  to  accomplish  all  this,  (i)  .^s  to  the  other  part  of  the  objection,  that  it  is  impro- 
bable that  Dauiil  would  le  so  .'oon  invested  with  office,  and  that  a  proclamation  would  be 
made  in  the  night  to  this  effect,  it  may  be  replied,  that  all  that  is  fiiirly  meant  in  the  chapter 
(ver.  29)  may  be  that  an  order  was  made  to  that  effect,  with  a  purpose  to  carry  it  into  execution 
on  the  folk  wing  day.  Bertholdt  himself  translates  the  pafsai;e  (ver.  29),  •  Then  Eelshazzar 
gave  fommard  that  th.v  should  clothe  Daniel  with  scarlet,  and  put  a  chain  of  gold  sround  his 
neck,'  kc  llierauf  lyali  BcLscliazar  den  Befehl  dem  Daniel  den  purpurmantel  und  den  goldenen 
Italsschmuck  umzubangeu,  &c.  On  the  one  hand,  nothing  forbids  the  supposition  that  tho 
execution  of  this  order  might  have  Ix-en  deferred  ;  or  on  the  other,  that  the  order  was  executed 
at  once.     Hut  little  time  wou'd  have  been  necessary  to  do  it.     See,  however.  Notes  on  ver  29. 

III.  A  third  objei  tion  or  aifficulty  arises  from  the  writing  itself.  It  is,  that  it  is  wholly  im- 
probable that  Daniel  could  have  had  sufficient  knowledge  to  enable  him  to  interpret  these 
words  when  no  one  of  the  Chaldean  sages  could  do  it.  Where,  it  is  asked,  could  he  have  ob- 
t;;iiM'd  this  knowledge?  His  instruction  in  reading  languages  he  must  have  received  in  liabylon 
it.=ef.  and  it  is  wlioUy  improbable  that  among  so  many  sages  and  wise  men  who  were  sccu.s- 
tomed  to  the  languages  spoken  in  lir.bylon  and  in  other  countries,  no  one  should  have  been 
louna  who  was  as  able  to  interpret  the  words  as  he,  Bertholdt,  p,  34P, 

To  this  it  is  obvious  to  reply,  that  the  whole  narrative  .supposes  that  Daniel  owed  his  ability 
to  interpret  the  e  words,  not  to  any  natural  skill,  or  to  any  superior  advantages  of  genius  or  educa- 
tion but  to  the  fact  that  he  was  directly  endowed  from  on  liigh.  In  other  cases,  in  the  times  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  he  always  disclaimed  any  power  of  his  own  of  revealing  the  nuaning  of 
ireams  and  visions  (eh.  ii.  27 — 30),  nor  did  he  set  up  any  claim  to  an  ability  to  do  it  cf  himself 


236  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  538 

en  tliis  ocrarion.  If  he  received  his  kncwlcdsrc  directly  frcm  Grd,  till  the  difficulty  in  this 
objection  vniiiFhes  at  occe;  but  the  -nholo  look  turns  en  the  suptofilion  that  he  was  ur.dii 
divine  teaching. 

IV.  It  has  hcen  oljected  that  there  was  no  ohject  to  be  accGmplished  wnrthj"  of  surh  a  mira^ 
cle  as  Ihatof  wrilinc  in  this  niystcrious  mnnceron  Il:e  wall.  It  is  a.'hed  \y  hertholdt  (p.  3J7;. 
'Is  the  miracle  credible?  Wliat  purpose  was  it  desi.sined  to  scrye?  AVhat  end  would  it  acccm- 
plish  ?  Vas  the  design  to  show  to  Kelshazzar  that  the  city  was  soon  to  K"  destroyed  ?  Kut  tf 
what  use  could  this  l:e  hut  a  couple  of  hours  hetbre  it  should  ctcur?  Or  was  it  the  design  to 
make  Belshazzar  acquainted  with  the  power  of  Jehovah,  and  to  punish  him  for  bis  desecrating 
the  vessels  of  the  temple  service?  But  who  could  attribute  to  the  all-perfect  being  such  a 
■weakness  that  he  toukl  be  !.i:firy.  and  take  this  mctbcd  to  expre.'s  his  anger,  for  an  ait  iLct 
could  not  be  regarded  as  so  heinous  as  to  be  worthy  of  such  an  interpcition?' 

To  this  it  may  be  replied.  (1)  That  the  objection  here  made  would  lie  in  some  degree  aprsirst 
almost  any  single  miracle  that  is  recorded  in  the  scriptures.  Or  (i)  It  may  have  been  the  intm- 
tion  to  warn  the  king  of  the  impending  danger,  not  so  much  with  a  view  that  the  darper 
should  be  averted,  as  to  show  that  it  came  from  Gcd.  Or  (3)  it  may  have  been  the  intention  to 
uhow  him  the  enormity  of  his  sins,  and  even  then  to  bring  him  to  repentance.  Or  (4)  it  may 
have  been  the  intention  to  connect  quite  distinctly,  in  the  apprehen.sion  of  all  preseut,  and  in 
the  view  of  all  future  ages,  the  destruction  of  Babylon  with  tl;c  crimes  of  the  mcnanhs.  and 
especially  their  crimes  in  connection  with  the  destruction  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  the  burning 
of  the  temple,  and  the  carrying  away  the  people  into  a  long  captivity.  There  can  be  no  doubt, 
from  many  parts  of  the  prophetic  writings,  that  the  overthrow  of  Babylon,  and  the  subversion 
of  the  Chaldean  power,  was  in  con.'cquence  of  their  treatment  of  the  llelrew  people,  rrd 
nothing  was  better  fitted  to  show  this  than  to  make  the  destruction  of  the  city  coincident  with 
the  destruction  of  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  temple.  Or  (5)  it  may  have  been  the  intention  to 
recall  Daniel  into  notice,  and  to  give  him  authority  and  influence  again  preparatory  to  the 
restoration  of  his  countrymen  to  their  own  land.  It  wotild  seem  frcm  the  whole  narrative 
that,  in  accordance  with  a  eustcm  which  still  prevails  in  Persia  (thardin,  as  referred  to  by 
Hengstenbcrg,  Atithentie  di*  Dan.  p.  12.3),  all  the  magicians  and  astrologers  had  been  dis- 
missed frcm  court  on  the  death  of  Kebuchadnezzar,  and  that  Daniel  with  the  others  had 
retired  from  his  place.  Yet  it  may  have  been  important,  in  order  to  the  restoration  of  the 
Hebrew  people  to  their  land  at  the  appointed  time,  that  there  sho.ild  be  one  of  their  own 
nation  occupying  an  influential  station  at  court,  and  Daniel  was  thus,  in  consequence  of  his 
ability  to  interpret  this  my.'teiious  language,  restored  to  his  place,  and  was  permitted  to  keep 
it  until  the  time  of  the  return  of  the  Hebrews  to  their  country  arrived  irce  ch.  \j.  2.  S,  28. 
And  (6)  it  may  have  been  the  intention  to  fumi.'h  an  imprefsive  demonstration  that  Jehovah 
is  thi"  true  tiod.  Other  objection.s  it  will  be  more  convenient  to  notice  in  the  course  of  the  ex- 
position of  the  chapter. 

§  2.   BELSIUZZAE. 

Of  Belshazzar,  the  closing  scene  of  whose  reign  is  described  in  this  chapter,  little  more  is 
kuown  than  is  recorded  here.  He  is  mentioned  by  Daniel  as  the  last  king  of  the  Chaidccs, 
under  whom  Babylon  was  taken  by  the  Jledes  and  I'ersians.  Hercdotus  (i.  ff)  calls  this  king  and 
also  his  father.  Lulynetus,  which  is  undoubtedly  a  corruption  of  Nabonnedus,  the  name  by  which 
he  was  ki;own  to  Eerosus.  Jrarphiis  ogoinst  Jpirn.  i.  20.  .'osephus  himself  (Ant.  x.  ch.  xi.  §  -) 
says  that  the  name  of  tb.is  king,  whom  he  calls  Baltassr.  t  mong  the  Babylonians,  was  Nabosn- 
delus.  N'alcnadius  in  the  canon  of  Ftohmy,  >alcntdus  in  hi.fcbius,  (('hicn.  Ainien.  i.  p.  0,) 
and  Kabcnnido(hus  in  tu.'-elius,  (Prep.  Kvang.ix.  4].)are  rcmaikcd  by  \A  icer  as  only  vadi'tiea 
of  his  nsmc.  ^Viner  conjectures  that  in  the  ctme  Eeithazzar,  the  element  sliazzay  means  '  ths 
principle  of  fire.'     fee  Kitto's  Cj'clcp. 

The  accounts  which  we  have  of  this  king  are  very  meagre,  and  yet  meagre  as  they  arc.  they  arc 
hy  no  means  unifoim.  and  it  is  diihcult  toieccncilethcm.  That  wl-it his  given  by  Josephus  as  his 
own  account  of  thesuttcffors  of  >rb\!(brdnczzar.  is  in  tbefclkwirglcrgvr!  e:  "  Aflir  the  death 
of  ]Sebu(hadrezzar,  Kvil  Weict'ath.  his  sen.  fr.fcicdtd  in  the  kirgiV  r\.  vbc  inmcciately  set 
Jeconiah  at  liberty,  and  cstcomcd  him  among  his  met  intimate  fri<nds.  V  h<  n  I.vilMeicdfih 
was  dead,  after  a  reign  of  eightctn  years,  Mgli.'.'ar.  his  .'cn,  tcck  the  govcinmint,  end  letaicid 
it  forty  years,  and  then  ended  his  life:  and  after  him  tl  e  fUKCfficn  cjme  to  his  sen.  1  alcfcr- 
dacus.  who  continued  it  in  all  but  nine  months:  aid  when  he  «  rs  di  i  d,  it  time  to  laltafir, 
who  by  the  Babyloniacs  was  called  Nalcanddus;  against  l.im  did  Cjiustlekirg  cf  Itrtia, 
and  I'/arius  the  king  cf  Jlcdia,  make  war:  ard  wlicn  he  was  loiegtd  in  Ealylcn  there  brp> 
pened  a  wonderful  and  yrcdigicus  vieicn.  He  was  fat  ccwn  at  suppirin  a  large  rccm.  .".nd 
there  were  a  great  many  vessels  of  silver,  futh  as  were  mace  fcr  loyal  cntertairmcr.ts.  rrd  ];e 
had  with  him  lis  fcr.tul  ires  i'.rd  bisfjicrds:  wbircrjcn  be  <ime  to  a  rescluticn.  .m  d  lem- 
mandcd  that  thwe  vessels  of  Gcd  which  Ntbuchadnezzar  had  plundered  out  of  Jerusalim.  ai;d 
had  not  mi  ue  use  of.  but  hj.d  put  ll.im  into  his  own  t(n>ple.  ^heu]d  le  licught  cut  cf  tlat 
t<?mplc."  Ant.  11.  X.  ch.  xi.  j  2.  Josephus  then  prccceds  to  give  an  account  cf  the  ap)  cj.rKrcc  cf 
the  hand,  and  of  the  writing,  and  of  the  result  in  the  takingof  Eabylcn,  sub.stantiaily  the  icuio 
as  that  ■nbifh  is  fci;rd  in  Ibis  chapter  cf  I  rniel. 

The  account  whiih  I'icrosus  gives  as  preserved  hy  Josephus  (against  Apion,  B.  i.  ?  2C).  varies 
from  this  in  Eome  important  particiilars.    Tor  an  "account  of  Bcrosus,  sec  the  Introduction  t« 


B.C.  538.]  CHAPTER   V.  237 

ch.  ir.  f  1. 1.  (2.)  no  says  "  Nabuchodonosar  (N'cbuchjidnezzar),  after  hehadbufrun  to  build  the 
foromontioii'.'d  wall,  fell  s^iok,  and  departed  this  life,  when  he  had  reigned  furty-three  years: 
whereupon  his  son,  Kvil-.Merodiich,  obtained  the  kingdom.  He  gaverned  public  affairs  after  an 
illfi^al  iind  impure  manner,  and  had  a  plot  laid  a>;ain.st  him  by  Neri^lissor,  his  sister's  husband, 
and  was  slain  by  him  when  he  had  reiined  but  two  years,  .■(fter  he  was  slain,  Neriiilissor,  the 
person  who  plotted  a.^ainst  him,  succeeded  him  in  the  kingdom,  and  reijjned  four  years; 
but  his  son  haboroso.-irchad  obtaincsl  the  kiui^dom,  though  he  were  but  a  child,  and  kept  it  but 
nine  months;  but  by  reason  of  the  very  ill-temper,  and  the  ill-practices  he  exhibited  to  the 
world,  a  plot  w:vs  laid  a,:;ainst  him  also  by  his  friends,  and  he  was  tormented  to  death.  After 
his  death  the  conspirators  ;40t  to^^ether,  and  by  common  consent  put  the  crown  upon  the  head 
of  Nabonnedu.s,  a  man  of  Uabylon,  and  one  who  belon;.;ed  to  that  insurrection.  In  his  reiirn  it 
was  that  the  walls  of  the  city  of  Babylon  were  curiously  built  with  burnt  brick  and  bitumen ; 
nnd  when  he  was  come  to  the  seventeenth  year  of  his  reiijn.  Cyrus  came  out  of  I'ersia  with  a  irreat 
army,  and  havini;  already  conquered  the  rest  of  Asia,  he  came  hastily  to  Babylonia.  When 
Nabonnedus  perceived  he  was  cominij  to  attack  him,  he  met  him  with  his  forces,  and  joining 
battle  with  him,  was  beaten,  and  tied  away  with  a  few  of  his  troops  with  him,  and  was  shut  up 
in  the  city  of  lior.'-ippus.  Hereupon  Cyrus  took  Babylon,  and  frave  orders  that  the  outer  walls 
of  the  city  should  be  demolished,  because  the  city  liad  proved  very  troublesome  to  him,  and  cost 
him  a  jji-eat  deal  of  p.'iins  lo  take  it.  He  then  marched  away  to  Borsippus  to  besiege  Nabonne- 
dus; but  as  .Nabonnedus  did  not  sustain  the  siege,  but  deliverinl  himself  into  his  hands,  he  was 
at  first  kindly  u.sed  by  Cyru.s,  who  gave  him  Canmania  as  a  place  for  him  to  inhabit  in,  but  sent 
him  out  of  liabylouia.  Accordinglj',  Xabonnedus  spent  the  rest  of  his  time  in  that  country, 
and  there  died." 

Koos  (Kxposition  of  Daniel,  p.  Co.)  supposes  that  Evil-Mcrodach,  who  succeeded  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, did  not  rei.rn  more  thati  one  year,  and  that  this  accounts  for  the  reason  why  he  was  not 
mentioned  by  Daniel ;  and  that  Bulsliazzar  was  a  grandson  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  though,  accord- 
ing to  the  idiom  of  ricripture,  he  is  called  his  .son,  and  Nebuchadnezzar  his  father.  Dau.  v.  11. 22. 
Belshazzar,  he  supposes,  must  have  reigned  more  than  twenty  years. 

The  suece.s.'^ion  in  the  Babylonian  Chaldean  kingdom,  according  to  Dr.  Hales,  was  as  follows: 
'  Nabonassar  reigned  14  years,  from  747,  B.C.;  Nadius,  2,  733;  Chiuzirus,  5,  731;  lugaus,  o, 
726;  .Mardok  Kmpad.  or  Merodach  Baladan,  12,  721;  Arcianus,  5,  7U'.l;  1st  interregnum.  2,  704; 
Belibus,  3,  702;  Aphronadiu.s,  tJ,  59'J;  Kegibelus,  1,  093;  Mesessemordach,  4,  092;  2d  inter- 
regnum, S,  G8S;  Asaradin,  or  Esar-haddon,  13,  680;  Saosduchin,  20,  607;  Chyneladon,  22,  647; 
>'ahopo!assar,  or  Labynetus  I..  21,  025 ;  Nineveh  taken  by  the  Babylonians  and  Medes,  COO,  B.  C, 
Then  follows  the  Babylonian  dynasty,  to  wit,  Nabopolassar,  Labynetus  I.,  Boktanscr,  or  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, who  reigned  43  years  from  004,  B.  C. ;  Ilvcrodam,  or  Kvil  Merodach,  3,  561,  B.  C. ; 
Nevicassolassar,  Neriglissar,  or  Belshazzar,  5,  558,  B.  C. ;  Nabonadiu.s,  or  Labynetus  II.,  ap- 
pointed by  Darius  the  Mede,  17,  553,  B.  C. ;  Babylon  taken  by  Cyrus,  536,  B.  C 

Dr.  Hales  remarks  in  connection  with  this,  "  Nothing  can  exceed  the  various  and  perplexed 
accounts  of  the  names  and  leigns  of  the  princes  of  this  dynasty  (the  Babylonian)  in  sacred  and 
prof.tne  history." 

Jahu,  following  Ptolemy,  chiefly  thus  enumerates  the  kings  of  Babylon  from  the  reign  of 
Nebuchadnezzar :  '  Nabochoiassar.  or  Nebuchadnezzar,  46, 605,  B.  C. ;  lluarodamus,  or  Evil-.Slero 
dach,  2,  502,  B.  C. :  Nerichassolassar.  or  Neriglissor,  4,  500,  B.  C. ;  Laborasoarchad,  9  months,  556, 
B.  C;  Nabounned,  17  years,  556,  B.  C. ;  Babylon  taken  by  the  Medes  and  Persians,  540,  B.  C 

In  this  confusion  and  discord  respecting  the  chronology  of  these  princes,  the  following  re- 
marks maybe  made  in  regard  to  the  credibility  of  the  statements  in  the  book  of  Daniel; 
(1)  It  is  clear  that  it  was  not  uncommon  fr.r  the  same  prince  to  have  more  names  than  one. 
'This  has  not  been  unusual,  especially  among  Oriental  princes,  who  seem  to  have  often  prided 
themselves  on  the  number  of  epithets  which  they  could  use  as  designating  their  royal  state. 
Since  this  was  the  case,  it  would  not  be  strange  if  the  names  of  the  same  kings  should  be  so 
used  by  writers,  or  in  tradition,  as  to  leave  the  impression  that  there  were  several;  or  if  one 
writer  should  designate  a  king  by  one  name,  and  another  by  another.  (2)  It  would  seem  pro-, 
bable,  from  all  the  accounts,  that  Belshazzar  w.is  iiw  grandson  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  but  little  ia 
known  of  the  king  or  kings  who.sc  reign  intervened  between  that  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and  Bel- 
shazzar. (3)  Tlie  testimony  of  Daniel  in  the  book  liefore  us  should  not  be  set  aside  by  the 
statement  of  Berosus,  or  by  the  other  confused  accounts  which  have  come  down  to  us.  For 
anything  that  appears  to  tlio  contrary,  tlie  authority  of  Daniel  is  as  good  as  that  of  Berosus,  and 
he  is  as  worthy  of  belief.  Living  in  Babylon,  and  through  a  great  part  of  the  reigns  of  this  dynasty ; 
present  at  the  taking  of  Babylon,  and  intimate  at  court;  honoured  by  some  of  these  princes 
more  than  any  other  man  in  the  realm,  there  is  no  reason  why  he  should  not  have  had  access 
to  tin;  meai:s  of  information  on  the  subject,  and  no  reason  why  it  should  not  be  supposed  that 
ho  has  given  a  fair  record  of  what  actually  occurred.  Though  the  account  in  regard  to  the  last 
days  cf  Belshazzar,  as  given  by  Berosus,  docs  not  agree  with  that  of  Daniel,  it  should  not  bo 
assumed  that  that  of  Berosus  is  correct,  and  that  of  Daniel  false.  The  account  in  Daniel  is,  to 
say  the  least,  as  probable  as  that  of  Berosus,  and  there  are  no  moans  of  proving  that  it  is  false 
except  by  thii  testimony  of  Berosus.  (4)  The  statement  in  Daniel  of  the  manner  in  which  Baby- 
lon was  taken,  and  of  the  death  of  Belshazzar.  is  continued  by  Xenophon  (Cyrop.  vii.) — an  au 
thority  quite  equal,  at  least,  to  that  of  llerosus.  See  Notes  on  ver.  .30  of  the  cha|iter.  In  the 
I  record  in  Daniel  of  the  close  of  the  life  of  Belshazzar.  there  is  nothing  that  might  not  have 
■been  supposed  to  occur,  for  nothing  is  more  probable  than  th.it  a  king  might  have  been  cele- 
brating a  feast  in  the  manner  described,  or  that  the  city  might  ba  suiprised  in  such  a  night  of 
I    ^elry.  or  that,  being  surprised,  the  woyareli  might  be  slain. 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  538, 


g  3.  ANALYSIS  OF  THE  CHAPTER. 

The  chapter  comprises  a  reroril  of  the  series  of  events  that  oceiurod  in  Bnhylon  on  the  ni<rht  In 
which  it  was  taken  by  the  Jleiles  and  I'crsians.  The  scene  may  lie  suiiposecj  to  open  in  the  early 
eveninfr.  at  a  time  when  a  festival  would  probably  be  celebialed,  and  to  continue  through  a 
considerable  part  of  the  ni^Iit.  It  is  not  known  precisely  at  what  time  the  city  was  taken,  yet 
it  may  be  suppvoscd  that  Cyrus  was  malun<r  his  approaches  v,  bile  the  revel  was  jroing  on  in 
the  palace,  and  that  even  while  Daniel  was  interpreting  tlie  l.ai:i!wr)linfr  on  the  wall,  he  was 
conducting  his  armies  along  the  channel  of  the  rivei .  and  through  the  open  gate  on  the  banks 
of  the  river,  toward  the  palace.  The  order  of  the  events  referred  to  is  as  follows:  (1)  Tlie  feast 
fciven  by  Belshazzar  in  his  palace,  vs.  1 — 1 ;  (2)  the  mysterious  appearance  of  the  part  of  the  hand 
on  the  walls,  ver.  5  ;  (3)  the  summoning  of  the  soothsayers  to  interi'rct  the  hand-writing,  and 
their  inability  to  do  it,  vs.  f — 9;  (4)  the  entrance  of  the  queen  into  the  banqueting-hall 
on  account  of  the  trouble  of  the  king,  and  her  reference  to  Daniel,  as  one  qualified  tn 
interpiet  the  vision,  vs.  10 — 12;  (5)  the  summoning  of  Daniel  by  the  king,  and  his  address  to 
him.  vs.  13 — 16;  (6)  the  answer  of  Daniel,  declining  any  rew.T.rds  for  his  servioo,  and  his  solemn 
address  to  the  king,  reminding  him  of  what  had  occurred  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  of  the  fact 
that  he  had  forgotten  the  lessons  which  the  divine  dealings  with  Nebuchadnezzar  were  adapted 
to  teach,  and  tliat  his  own  heart  had  been  lifted  up  with  pride,  and  that  his  conduct  liad  been 
eminently  wicked,  vs.  17 — 23;  (7)  the  interpretation  of  the  words  by  Daniel,  vs.  24 — 28;  (S)  the 
order  to  clothe  Daniel  in  a  manner  appropriate  to  one  of  high  rank,  and  the  appointment  to  the 
third  office  in  the  kingdom,  ver.  29 ;  and  (9)  the  taking  of  the  city,  and  the  death  of  Belshazzar, 
vs.  ^0,  31. 


1  Belshazzar  the  king  made  a 
great  feast  '■  to  a  thousand  of  his 

=  Es.  1.3. 

1.  Belshazzar  the  king.  See  Intro,  to 
the  chapter,  §  2.  In  the  Introduction  to 
the  chapter  hero  referred  to,  I  have  stated 
what  seemed  to  be  necessary  in  order  to 
illustrate  the  history  of  Belshazzar,  so  far 
as  that  can  be  now  known.  The  state- 
ments in  regard  to  this  monarch,  it  is  well 
understood,  are  exceedingly  confused,  and 
the  task  of  reconciling  them  is  now  hope- 
less. Little  depends,  however,  in  the  in- 
terpretation of  this  book,  on  the  attempt 
to  reconcile  them,  for  the  narrative  here 
given  is  equally  credible,  whichever  of 
the  accounts  are  taken,  unless  that  of  Bc- 
rosus  is  followed.  But  it  may  not  be  im- 
proper to  exhibit  here  the  two  principal 
accounts  of  the  successors  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, that  the  discrepancy  may  be  dis- 
tinctly seen.  I  copy  from  the  Pictorial 
Bible.  "  The  common  account  we  sh.all 
collect  from  '  L'  Art  de  Verifier  les  Dates,' 
and  the  other  from  Hales'  'Analysis,'  dis- 
posing tliem  in  opposite  columns  for  the 
bake  of  comparison  : 

From 'L'Artde  Verijler.'  From  Halc^  ^Analysis.' 

B.  C.  B.  C. 

605  Nebuchadnezzar,  C04  Nebuchadnezzar 
who  was  succeeded  was  succeeded  by 

by  his  son  his  son 

162  E  vil-Merodach,  561  Kvil-Merodach,  or 
who    having    pro-  1 1  v  erodam.  who 

■"oked    general    in-  uas     slain     in      a 

diguation    by    his  battle  against  the 

tyranny  and  atro         Jkledus    and    Per- 


lords,   and  drank  -vvine  before   the 
thousand. 


cities,  was,  after  a 
sliort  reign  of  a- 
bout  two  years,  as- 
sassinated by  his 
brother-in  law 
560  Ncrigilassar,  or  No-  558 
ricas.«olassar,  who 
was  regarded  as  a 
deliverer,  and  suc- 
c ceded  by  the 
choice  of  the  na- 
tion. He  perished 
in  a  battle  by  Cy- 
rus, and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  his  son 


555  Laborosoarchad,  553 
notorious  for  L:a 
cruelty  and  oppi-es- 
sion,  and  who  was 
assas.sinated  by  two 
nobles,  G  o  b  r  y  a  s 
and  Gadatas.whose 
sons  he  had  slain. 
The  vacant  throne 
was  then  ascended 
by 


f  ians,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  his  son 


NerigHssar,  Neri- 
cassolassar,  or  Bel- 
shazzar, tlie  com- 
mon accounts  of 
whom  seem  to  com- 
bine what  is  said 
both  of  Neriglis- 
sar,  and  his  son, 
opposite.  lie  was 
killed  by  con.spira- 
tors  on  the  night 
of  the  'impious 
feast,'  leaving  a 
son  (a  boy), 
Laborosoarchad.  on 
who.se  death,  nine 
months  after,  the 
dynasty  became  ex- 
tinct, and  the  king- 
dom came  peacea- 
bly to  ••  Darius  the 
Mede,"  or  Cj-axarcs 
who.  on  the  weil- 
known  policyof  thi» 
Wedes  and  Per- 
sians, appointed  a 
Babylonian  noble- 
man, named  Nabo- 
nadiits,  or  Labyne- 
tns,  to  be  king,  or 
viceroy.  Tliis  per- 
son  revolted 
against  Cyrus,  who 
had  succeeded  to 
the  viniteU  empire 


B,C.  538.1 


CHAPTER   V. 


239 


2  Belshazzar,  -while  he  tasted  the  I''  father  Nebuchadnezzar  had  « taken 
wine,  commanded  to  bring  the  out  of  the  temple  which  was  in  Je- 
golden  and  silver  vessels  » which  his  !  rusalem  ;    that   the   king,    and    his 


'  Je.  52. 19.    c.  1.  2. 


of  the  Jledos  and 
I'crsians.  Cyrus 
could  not  immedi- 
atuly  attend  to 
liin,,  but  at  last 
marched  to  Baby- 
lon, took  tlie  city, 
B.  C.  5  56,  as  fore- 
told by  the  pro- 
phets. 
654  Xabonadius,    the 

Labynetus  of  He- 
rodotus, the  Xabo- 

andel  of  Josephus, 

and  the  Belshazzar 

of  Daniel,  who  was 

the  son  of  K  v  i 1  - 

Merodach,  and  who 

now   succxjcdoJ  to 

the  throne  of  his 

father.    After  a  vo- 
luptuous rci.;n,  his 

city  was  taken  by 

the  Persians  under 

Cyrus,    on    which 

occasion  he  lost  his 

life. 

"  It  will  be  observed  that  the  principal 
point  of  difference  in  these  accounts  is, 
that  Hales  contends  that  the  succession 
of  Darius  the  Mede  to  the  Babylonian 
throne  was  not  attended  with  war;  that 
Belshazzar  was  not  the  king  in  whose 
time  the  city  was  taken  by  Cyrus  ;  and 
consequently,  that  the  events  which  took 
place  this  night  were  quite  distinct  from, 
and  anterior  to  that  siege  and  capture  of 
the  city  by  the  Persian  king,  which  Isaiah 
and  Jeremiah  so  remarkably  foretold." 
^  Made  a  great  feast.  On  what  occasion 
this  feast  was  made,  is  not  stated,  but  it 
was  not  improbably  an  annual  festival  in 
honour  of  some  of  the  Babylonian  deities. 
This  opinion  seems  to  be  countenanced 
by  the  words  of  the  Codex  Chis.  '  Bel- 
shazzar the  king  made  a  great  festival, 
iv  hjjipj  ci'iaii'iajiov  nov  (i ivy I'hiiwv — on  the 
day  of  the  dedication  of  his  kingdoms  ;' 
and  in  ver.  4,  it  is  said  that  '  they  praised 
the  gods  of  gold,  of  silver,  and  of  brass,' 
&C.  %  To  n  thomand  of  his  lordx.  The 
Word  thousand  here  is  doubtless  used  as  a 
general  term  to  denote  a  very  large  num- 
ber. It  is  not  improb.able,  however,  that 
this  full  number  was  assembled  on  such 
an    occasion.     '•'  Ctesias    says,  that    the 


^  or,  grandfather,  as  Je.  27.  7.    2  Sa.  9.  7. 
■ver.  11,  IS.  c  braught  forth. 


king  of  Persia  furnished  pn-visions  daily 
for  twenty-five  thousand  men.  Quintus 
Ciirtius  says  that  ten  thousand  men  were 
present  at  a  festival  of  Alexander  the 
Great ;  and  Statius  says  of  Domitian,  that 
he  ordered,  on  a  certain  occasion,  his 
guests  'to  sit  down  at  a  thousand  tables.'" 
Prof.  Stuart,  in  loo.  ^  And  drank  vine 
before  the  thousand.  The  Latin  Vulgate 
here  is,  '  And  each  one  drank  according  to 
his  ago.'  The  Greek  of  Theodotion,  the 
Arabic,  and  the  Coptic  is,  '  and  wine  was 
before  the  thousand.'  The  Chaldee,  how- 
ever, is,  as  in  our  version,  '  ho  drank 
wine  before  the  thousand.'  As  he  was 
the  lord  of  the  feast,  and  as  all  that  oc- 
curred pertained  primarily  to  him,  the 
design  is  undoubtedly  to  describe  /u's  con- 
duct, and  to  show  the  effect  which  the 
drinking  of  wine  had  on  him.  He  drank 
it  in  the  most  public  manner,  setting  an 
example  to  his  lords,  and  evidently  drink- 
ing it  to  great  excess. 

2,  3.  Belshazzar,  v:hilehe  tasted  theioine. 
As  the  effect  of  tasting  the  wine — stating 
a  fact  which  is  illustrated  in  every  age 
and  land,  that  men,  under  the  influence 
of  intoxicating  drinks,  will  do  what  they 
would  not  do  when  sober.  In  his  sober 
moments,  it  would  seem  probable  that 
he  would  have  respected  the  vessels  con- 
secrated to  the  service  of  religion,  and 
would  not  have  treated  them  with  dis- 
honour by  introducing  them  for  pur- 
poses of  revelry.  ^  Commanded  to  hring 
the  fjolden  and  silver  vessels.  These  ves- 
sels had  been  carefully  deposited  in  some 
place  as  the  spoils  of  victory,  (see  ch.  i.  2,) 
and  it  would  appear  that  they  had  not 
before  been  desecrated  for  purposes  of 
feasting.  Belshazzar  did  what  other  men 
would  have  done  in  the  same  condition. 
He  wished  to  make  a  display;  to  do 
something  unusually  surprising;  and, 
though  it  had  not  been  contemplated 
when  the  festival  was  appointed  to  make 
use  of  these  vessels,  j-et  under  the  excite- 
ment of  wine,  nothing  was  too  sacred  to 
be  introduced  to  the  scenes  of  intoxica- 
tion;  nothing  too  foolish  to  be  done.  In 
regard  to  the  vessels  taken  from  the  tem- 
ple at  Jerusalem,  see  Notes  on  ch.  i.  2. 
^  Which  his  father  Nebtichadntizar  had 


240 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538. 


princes,   his  wive?,  and  his  concu- '  temple  of  tlie  house  of  God  which 
bines,  might  drink  therein.  teas  at  Jerusalem  ;    and   the   king, 

3  Then  they  brought  tlie  golden  !  and  his  princes,  his  wives,  and  his 
vessels  that  were  taken  out  of  the '  concubines  drank  in  them. 


iohen.  M■.^rg.,  grnudfather.  Accordins^  to 
biie  best  account  which  we  have  of  Bel- 
shazzar,  be  was  the  son  of  Evil-Mero- 
ciach,  who  was  the  son  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, (see  the  Intro,  to  the  chapter,  jj  2,) 
and  therefore  the  word  is  used  here,  as  in 
the  margin,  to  denote  grandfather.  Couip. 
Jcr.  .\xvii.  7.  See  Notes  on  Isa.  xiv.  22. 
The  word  father  is  often  used  in  a  lart;e 
signitication.  See  2  S.am.  ix.  7 ;  also 
Notes  on  Matt.  i.  ].  There  is  no  impro- 
bability in  supposing  that  this  word 
would  be  used  to  denote  a  grandfather, 
wlien  applied  to  one  of  the  family  or 
dj'nasty  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  The  fact 
fluit  Belshazzar  is  here  called  the  son  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  has  been  made  a  ground 
of  objection  to  the  credibilit}'  of  the  book 
of  Daniel,  by  Lengerke,  p.  204.  The 
objection  is,  that  the  '•  last  king  of  Baby- 
lon was  not  a  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar." 
But,  in  reply  to  this,  in  addition  to  the 
remarks  above  made,  it  may  be  observed 
that  it  is  not  necessary  in  vindicating  the 
assertion  in  the  text  to  suppose  that  he 
was  the  immediate  descendant  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, in  the  first  degree.  "  The 
Semitic  use  of  the  word  in  question  goes 
far  beyond  the  first  dogreR  of  descent, 
and  extends  the  appellation  of  von  to  the 
designation  ffrandxou,  and  even  of  the 
most  remote  posterity.  In  Ezra  vi.  14, 
the  prophet  Zechariah  is  called  the  son 
of  Iddo;  in  Zech.  i.  ],  7,  the  same  per- 
son is  c.llled  the  son  of  Barachiah.  tlie  son 
of  Iddo.  So  Isaiah  threatens  Ilezekiah 
(xxxix.  7,)  that  the  sons  whom  he  shall 
i<?yet  shall  be  conducted  as  exiles  to  Baby- 
lon ;  in  which  case,  however,  four  gene- 
rations intervened  before  this  happened. 
So  in  Matt.  i.  1,  'Jesus  Christ,  the  son 
of  David,  the  son  of  Abraham.'  And  so 
we  speak  every  day  :  '  The  sons  of  Adam, 
the  sons  of  Abraham,  the  sons  of  Israel, 
the  sons  of  the  Pilgrims,'  and  the  like." 
Prof.  Stuart,  Com.  on  Daniel  p.  ] 44. 
^  That  the  Jcin<j,  and  his  princes,  his 
wires,  and  his  concubines,  miijht  drink 
therein.  Nothing  is  too  sacred  to  be  pro- 
faned when  men  are  under  the  influence 
of  wine.  They  do  not  hesitate  to  dese- 
crate the  holiest  things,  and  vessels  taken 
from  the  altar  of  God  are  regarded  with 
as  little  reverence  as  any  other.     It  would 


seem  that  Nebuchadnezzar  had  some  re- 
spect for  these  vessels  as  having  been 
employed  in  the  purposes  of  religion — at 
least  so  much  respect  as  to  lay  them 
up  as  trophies  of  victory,  and  that  this 
respect  had  been  shown  for  them  un- 
I  der  the  reign  of  his  successo's,  until 
j  the  exciting  scenes  of  this  '  impious  feast' 
1  occurred,  when  all  veneration  for  them 
vanished.  It  was  not  very  common  for 
females  in  the  East  to  be  present  at  such 
I  festivals  as  this,  but  it  would  seem  that 
all  the  usual  restraints  of  propriety  and 
decency  came  to  be  disregarded  as  the 
feast  advanced.  The  'wives  and  concu- 
bines' were  probably  not  present  when 
the  feast  began,  for  it  was  made  for  'his 
•  lords'  {ver.  1),  but  when  the  scenes  of 
revelry  had  advanced  so  far  that  it  was 
proposed  to  introduce  the  sacred  vessels 
of  the  temple,  it  would  not  be  unnatural 
to  propose  also  to  introduce  the  females 
I  of  the  court.  A  similar  instance  is  re- 
I  lated  in  the  book  of  Esther.  In  the  feast 
I  which  Ahasuerus  gave,  it  is  said  that  "  on 
j  the  seventh  day  when  the  heart  of  the 
j  king  was  merry  with  wine,  he  com- 
manded Jlehuman,  Biztha,  &c.,  the  seven 
I  chamberlains  that  served  in  the  presence 
of  Ahasuerus  the  king,  to  bring  Vashti, 
I  the  queen,  before  the  king,  with  the  crown 
I  royal,  to  show  the  people  and  the  princes 
I  her  beauty,"  &c.  Esther  i.  10,  11.  Comp. 
Joseph.  Ant.  B.  xi.  ch  vi.  §1.  The 
'  females  that  were  thus  introduced  to  the 
[  banquet,  were  those  of  the  harem,  yet  it 
I  would  seem  that  she  who  Avas  usually 
called  '  the  queen'  by  way  of  eminence, 
or  the  queen-mother,  (Comp.  Notes  on 
j  ver  10,)  was  not  among  them  at  this  time. 
The  females  in  the  court  of  an  Oriental 
monarch  were  divided  into  two  classes  ; 
j  those  who  were  properly  concubines,  and 
i  who  had  none  of  the  privileges  of  a  wife; 
and  those  of  a  higher  class,  and  who  were 
[  spoken  of  as  wives,  and  to  whom  apper- 
I  tained  the  privileges  of  that  relation. 
:  Among  the  latter,  also,  in  the  court  of  a 
Iking,  it  would  seem  that  there  was  one 
[  to  whom  properly  belonged  the  appella- 
j  tion  oi  queen — that  is,  probably,  a  favourite 
wife  whose  children  were  heirs  to  the 
I  crown.  See  Bertholdt,  in  loc.  Comp. 
1  2  Sam.  V.  13 ;  1  Kings  xi.  3 ;  Cant.  vi.  8. 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    V. 


241 


4  They  drank  Avine,  and  piMised 
the  gods  of  gold,  ^  and  of  silver, 
of  brass,  of  iron,  of  wood,  and  of 

stone. 


» Re.  9.  20. 


4.  Tliey  drank  luine,  and  praised  (he 
guds  of  gold,  and  of  silver,  &c.  Comp. 
Notes  on  ver.  1.  Idols  were  made  among 
the  heathen  of  all  the  materials  here  men- 
tioned. The  word  jjraised  here  means 
that  they  spake  in  praise  of  these  gods  ; 
of  their  history,  of  their  attributes,  of 
what  they  had  done.  Nothing  can  well 
be  conceived  more  senseless  and  stupid 
than  what  it  is  said  they  did  at  this  feast, 
and  yet  it  is  a  fair  illustration  of  what 
occurs  in  all  the  festivals  of  idolatry. 
And  is  that  which  occurs  in  more  civi- 
lized. Christian  lands,  in  the  scenes  of 
carousal  and  festivity,  more  rational  than 
this?  It  was  not  much  worse  to  lavish 
praises  on  idol  gods  in  a  scene  of  revelry 
than  it  is  to  lavish  praises  on  idol  men 
now  ;  not  much  less  rational  to  '  toast' 
gods  than  it  is  to  *  toast'  wen. 

6.  In  the  same  hour.  On  the  word  Jiour, 
see  Notes  on  ch.  iv.  19.  ^  Came  forth 
fingers  of  a  man's  hand.  Not  the  whole 
hand,  but  only  the  parts  usually  employed 
in  writing.  Not  a  man  writing;  not  even 
an  arm,  but  fingers  that  seemed  to  move 
themselves.  They  appeared  to  come  forth 
from  the  walls,  and  were  seen  before  they 
began  to  write.  It  was  this  that  made  it 
so  impressive  anil  alarming.  It  could 
not  be  supposed  that  it  was  the  work 
of  man,  or  that  it  was  devised  by  man 
for  the  purpose  of  producing  consterna- 
tion. It  was  perfectly  manifest  to  all 
wlTo  were  there  that  this  was  the  work  of 
some  one  superior  to  man ;  that  it  was 
designed  as  a  divine  intimation  of  some 
kind  in  regard  to  the  scene  that  was  then 
occurring.  But  whether  as  a  rebuke  for 
the  sin  of  revelry  and  dissipation,  or 
for  sacrilege  in  drinking  out  of  the  con- 
secrated vessels,  or  whether  it  was  an 
intimation  of  some  approaching  fear- 
ful calamity,  would  not  at  once  be  ap- 
parent. It  is  easy  to  imagine  that  it 
would  produce  a  sudden  pause  in  their 
revelry,  and  diffuse  seriousness  over  their 
minds.  The  suddenness  of  the  appear- 
ance; the  lingers,  unguided  bj'  the  hand 
of  "aaan,  slowly  writing  in  mysterious 
jhuracters  on  the  walls ;  the  conviction 
jrhich    must    have    flasled    acros.s    the 


5  ^  In  the  same  hour  ^  came  forth 

fingers  of  a  man's  hand,  and  wrota 

over  against  the   candlestick  upon 

the  plaster  of  the  wall  of  the  king's 

•'0.4.  31. 


mind  that  this  must  be  either  to  rebuke 
them  for  their  sin,  or  to  announce  some 
fearful  calamity,  all  these  things  must 
have  combined  to  produce  an  overwhelm- 
I  ing  effect  on  the  revellers.  Perhaps,  from 
the  prevalent  views  in  the  heathen  world 
in  regard  to  the  crime  of  sacrilege,  they  may 
have  connected  this  mysterious  appear- 
ance with  the  profane  act  which  they  were 
then  committing— that  of  desecrating  the 
vessels  of  the  temple  of  God.  How  natural 
would  it  be  to  suppose — recognizing  as 
they  did  the  gods  of  other  nations  as 
real,  as  truly  as  those  which  they  wor- 
shipped— that  the  God  of  the  Hebrews, 
seeing  the  vessels  of  his  worship  profaned, 
had  come  forth  to  express  his  displeasure, 
and  to  intimate  that  there  was  impending 
wrath  for  such  an  act.  The  crime  of 
sacrilege  was  regarded  among  the  heathen 
as  one  of  the  most  awful  which  could  bo 
committed,  and  there  was  no  state  of 
mind  in  which  men  would  be  more  likely 
to  be  alarmed  than  when  they  were,  even 
in  the  midst  of  scenes  of  drunken  revelry, 
engaged  in  such  an  act.  "The  heathen," 
says  Grotius,  "thought  it  a  great  impiety 
to  convert  sacred  things  to  common 
uses."  Numerous  instances  are  on  record 
of  the  sentiments  entertained  among  the 
heathen  on  the  subject  of  sacrilege,  and 
of  the  calamities  which  were  believed  to 
come  upon  men  as  a  punishment  for  it. 
Among  them  we  may  refer  to  the  misera- 
ble end  of  the  Phocians,  who  robbed  the 
temple  of  Delphos,  and  whose  act  was  the 
occasion  of  that  war  which  was  called  the 
holy  war  ;  the  destruction  of  the  Gauls  in 
their  attempt  upon  the  same  temple  ;  and 
of  Crassus,  who  plundered  the  temple  of 
Jerusalem,  and  that  of  the  Syrian  god- 
dess. See  Lowth,  in  loc.  That  a  convic- 
tion of  the  sin  of  sacrilege,  according  to 
the  prevalent  belief  on  the  subject,  may 
have  contributed  to  produce  consterna- 
tion when  the  fingers  of  the  hand  ap- 
peared at  Belshazzar's  feast,  there  is  no 
good  reason  to  doubt,  and  we  may  sup- 
pose that  the  minds  of  the  revellers  were 
at  once  turned  to  the  insult  which  they 
bad  thus  offered  to  the  God  of  the  He- 


21 


242 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  538 


palace :  and  the  king  saw  the  part 
of  the  hand  that  wrote. 

C  Then  ^  the  king's  ^  countenance 

was  changed,    and    his    thouglits 

troubled  him,  so  that  the  ''joints  of 

his  loins  were  loosed,  and  his  knees 

*  smote  one  against  another. 

*  Is.  21.  2 — i.  ^  ln->g?itnesses.  rer.  0.    c  chantjed  it. 

i bindings,  or,  knots;  or,  girdles.  Is.  5.  27. 


brews,  f  And  icrote  over  against  the  can- 
dlestick. The  candlestick,  or  lamp-bearer, 
perhaps,  Trhich  had  been  taken  from  the 
temple  at  Jerusalem,  and  which  was,  as 
well  as  the  sacred  vessels,  introduced  into 
'■.his  scene  of  revelry.  It  is  probable  that 
as  they  brought  out  the  vessels  of  the 
temple  to  drink  in,  they  would  alse  bring 
out  all  that  had  been  taken  from  the  tem- 
ple in  Jerusalem.  Two  objects  may 
have  been  contemplated  in  the  fact  that 
the  writing  was  '  over  against  the  can- 
dlestick :'  one  was  that  it  might  be  clearly 
visible,  the  other  that  it  might  be  more 
directly  intimated  that  the  writing  was  a 
rebuke  for  the  act  of  sacrilege.  On  the 
probable  situation  where  this  miracle  oc- 
curred, the  reader  may  consult  Taylor's 
Fragments  to  Calmet's  Dictionary,  No. 
205.  lie  supposes  that  it  was  one  of  the 
large  inner  courts  of  the  palace — that  part 
of  the  palace  which  was  prohibited  to 
persons  not  sent  for.  See  Notes  on  ver.  10. 
^[  Upon  the  plaster  of  the  icall.  The  Chal- 
dee  word  means  lime,  not  inappropriately 
rendered  here  plaster.  The  ynanner  of 
the  writing  is  not  specified.  All  that  is 
necessary  to  suppose  is,  that  the  letters 
were  traced  along  on  the  wall  so  as  to  be 
distinctly  visible.  AVhether  they  seemed 
to  be  cut  into  the  plaster,  or  to  be  traced 
in  black  lines,  or  lines  of  light,  is  not 
mentioned,  and  is  immaterial.  They 
were  such  as  could  be  seen  distinctly  by 
the  king  and  the  guests.  Compare, 
however,  the  remarks  of  Taylor  in  the 
'Fragment'  just  referred  to.  *^  And 
the  king  saw  the  jiart  of  the  hand  that 
wrote.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose 
that  the  others  did  not  see  it  also,  but 
ihe  king  was  the  most  important  person- 
age there,  and  the  miracle  was  intended 
particularly  for  him.  Perhaps  his  eyes 
were  first  attracted  to  it. 

6.  Then  the  Icing's  countenance  was 
thaiiyed.  The  word  rendered  covnte- 
naiice,  is  in  the  margin,  as  in  ver.  9,  briyht- 


7  The  king  cried  f  aloud  to  bring 
in  the  s  astrologers,  the  Chaldeans, 
and  the  soothsayers.  And  the  king 
spake,  and  said  to  the  wise  jnen  of 
Babylon,  AVhosoever  shall  read  this 
writing,  and  show  me  the  interpre- 
tation thereof,  shall  be  clothed  with 

eNa.  2.  10.  f  with  might, 

s  c.  2.  2.  Is.  47.  13. 


nesses.  The  Chaldee  word  means  bright' 
ness,  sjylendor — v?,  and  the  meaning  here 
is  bright  looks,  cheerfulness,  hilarity. 
The  word  rendered  was  changed,  is  in  the 
margin  changed  it  ;  and  the  meaning  is, 
that  it  changed  itself: — probably  from  a 
jocund,  cheerful,  and  happy  expression, 
it  assumed  suddenly  a  deadly  paleness. 
^^And  his  thoughts  troubled  him.  Whether 
from  the  recollection  of  guilt,  or  the  dread 
of  wrath,  is  not  said.  He  would  doubt- 
less regard  this  as  some  supernatural  in- 
timation, and  his  soul  would  be  troubled. 
*i\So  that  the  joints  of  his  loins  xoere  loosed. 
Marg.,  bindings,  or  knots,  or  girdles.  The 
Chaldee  word  rendered  joints,  Sap,  means 
properly /^•»o^9y  then  joints  of  the  bones, 
as  resembling  knots,  or  apparently  an- 
swering the  purposes  of  knots  in  the  hu- 
man frame,  as  binding  it  together.  Th(3 
word  loins  in  the  Scriptures  refers  to  the 
part  of  the  body  around  which  the  girdle 
was  passed,  the  lower  part  of  the  back; 
and  Gesenius  supposes  that  the  meaning 
here  is,  that  the  joints  of  his  back,  that  is, 
the  vertebra;,  are  referred  to.  This  part 
of  the  body  is  spoken  of  as  the  seat  of 
strength.  When  this  is  weak,  the  body  has 
no  power  to  stand,  to  walk,  to  labour.  The 
simple  idea  is,  that  he  was  greatly  terrilied, 
and  that  under  the  influence  of  fear  hia 
strength  departed.  ^[  And  h  is  knees  smote 
one  against  another.  A  common  effect 
of  fear,  Nah.  ii.  10.  So  Horace,  Et  corde, 
et  genibus  tremit.  And  so  Virgil,  Tarda 
trementi  genua  lahant.  "  Belshazzar  had 
as  much  of  power,  and  of  drink  withal  to 
lead  him  to  bid  defiance  to  God  as  any 
ruflian  under  heaven  ;  and  yet  when  God, 
as  it  were,  lift  but  up  his  finger  against 
him,  how  poorly  did  he  crouch  and  shiver. 
How  did  his  joints  loose,  and  his  knees 
knock  together  !"  South's  Sermons,  vol. 
iv.  p.  60. 

7.  The  king  cried  aloud.  Marg.,  as  in 
the  Chaldee,  with  might.  This  indicates 
a  sudden  and  an  alarming  cry.     The  king 


B.  C.  538.] 


CIIAFTEll    V, 


243 


» scarlet,  and  have  a  chain  of  gold 
about  his  neck,  and  shall  be  the 
third  b  ruler  in  the  kingdom. 

8  Then    came    in  all  the  king's 
»  or,  purple. 


was  deeply  terrified ;  and,  unable  himself 
to  divine  the  meaning  of  the  mysterious 
appearance  of  the  hand,  he  naturally 
turned  at  once  to  those  whose  otfice  it 
was  to  explain  dreams  and  supernatural 
appearances.  ^  To  bring  in  the  astrolo- 
gers, <fcc.  See  Notes  on  eh.  ii.  2,  iv.  7. 
*\  And  said  to  the  wise  men  of  Bahijlon. 
Those  just  referred  to — the  astrologers,  Ac. 
Having  the  power,  as  was  supposed,  of 
interpreting  the  indications  of  coming 
events,  thoy  were  esteemed  as  eminently 
wise.  ^  Whosoever  shall  read,  this  u-rit- 
i)tg.  It  would  seem  from  this  that  even 
the  characters  were  not  familiar  to  the 
king  and  to  those  who  were  with  him. 
Evidently  the  letters  were  not  in  the 
ordinary  Chaldee  form,  but  in  some  form 
which  to  them  was  strange  and  unknown. 
Thus  there  was  a  double  mystery  hang- 
ing over  the  writing — a  mystery  in  re- 
gard to  the  language  in  which  the  words 
were  written,  and  to  the  meaning  of  the 
words.  Many  conjectures  have  been 
formed  as  to  the  language  employed  in 
this  writing,  (Comp.  Notes  on  ver.  2-1,) 
but  such  conjectures  are  useless,  since  it  is 
impossible  now  to  ascertain  what  it  was. 
As  the  writing,  however,  had  a  primary 
reference  to  the  sacrilege  committed  in  re- 
gard to  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  temple, 
and  as  Daniel  was  able  to  road  the  letters 
at  once,  it  would  seem  not  improbable  that 
the  words  were  in  the  Hebrew  character 
then  used — a  character  such  as  that  found 
now  in  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch — for 
the  Chaldee  character  now  found  in  the 
Bible  has  not  improbably  been  substituted 
for  the  more  ancient  and  less  elegant 
character  now  found  in  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch  alone.  There  is  no  improba- 
bility in  supposing  that  even  the  astrolo- 
gers and  the  soothsayers  were  not  familiar 
with  that  character,  and  could  not  readily 
read  it.  ^  And  show  me  the  interpretation 
thereof.  The  meaning  of  the  words. 
^  Shall  he  clothed  with  scarlet.  The 
colour  worn  usually  by  princes  and  by 
persons  of  rank.  The  margin  is  imrple. 
So  the  Greek  of  Tbeodotion — TTopipipav. 
Bo  also  the  Latin  Vulgate — purpura.  On 
(he  nature   and  uses  of  this  colour,  see 


wise  men :  but  they  cOuld  not  read 
the  writing,  nor  make  known  to  the 
king  the  interpretation  thereof. 
9    Then    was     king     Belshazzi,r 
be.  6.  2. 

Notes  on  Isa.  i.  18.  %  And  have  a  chain 
of  gold  about  his  neck.  Also  indicative 
of  rank  and  authority.  Comp.  Gen.  xli. 
42.  When  Joseph  was  placed  over  the 
land  of  Egypt,  the  king  honoured  him 
in  a  similar  manner,  by  putting  "  a  gold 
chain  about  his  neck."  This  was  com- 
mon in  Persia.  See  Xen.  Cyrop.  I.  3, 
2,  II.  4,  6,  VII.  5,  18;  Anab.  I.  5,  8. 
Upon  most  of  the  figures  in  the  ruins  of 
Persepolis  the  same  ornament  is  now 
found.  Prof.  Stuart  renders  this,  "a 
collar  of  gold."  %  And  shall  be  the  third 
ruler  in  the  kingdom.  Of  course,  the 
king  was  first.  Who  the  second  was,  or 
why  the  one  who  could  disclose  the  mean- 
ing of  the  words  should  not  be  raised  to 
the  second  rank,  is  not  stated.  It  may 
be,  that  the  office  of  prime  minister  was 
so  fixed,  or  was  held  by  one  whose  ser- 
vices were  so  important  to  the  king,  that 
he  could  not  be  at  once  displaced.  Or 
the  meaning  may  be,  that  the  lavoured 
person  who  could  interpret  this,  would  be 
raised  to  the  third  rank  of  dignity,  or 
placed  in  the  third  class  of  those  who 
held  offices  in  the  realm.  The  Chal- 
dee is,  'and  shall  rule  third  in  the  king- 
dom,' and  the  idea  would  seem  rather  to 
be  that  he  should  be  of  the  third  rank  or 
grade  in  office.  So  Bertholdt  understands 
it.  Grotius  understands  it  as  the  third 
person  in  rank.  He  says  the  first  was  the 
king;  the  second  the  son  of  the  king; 
the  third  the  prince  of  the  Satraps. 

8.  Then  came  in  all  the  king's  luise  men. 
The  classes  above  referred  to,  ver.  7. 
^  But  thcg  could  not  read  the  writing. 
The  character  was  an  unknown  character 
to  them.  It  mag  have  been  a  character 
which  was  not  found  in  ang  language, 
and  which  made  the  power  of  Daniel  to 
read  it  the  more  remarkable,  or  it  may 
have  been,  as  suggested  in  the  Notes  on 
ver.  7,  a  foreign  character  with  which 
they  had  no  acquaintance,  though  fami- 
liar to  Daniel. 

9.  Then  was  king  Belshazzar  greailg 
troubled.  Not  doubting  that  this  waii  a 
divine  intimation  of  some  fearful  event, 
and  yet  unable  to  understand  its  mean- 
ing.   We  are  quite  as  likely  to  be  trou- 


244 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  538. 


greatly  troubled,  and  his  ^^  counte- 
nance was  changed  in  him,  and  his 
lords  were  astonished. 

10  ^  Now  the  queen  by  reason  of 
the  words  of  the  king  and  his  lords 
camo  into  the  banquet  house :  and 

lihrightnesses.  ver.  6. 

Wed  by  what  is  merely  wi/stcn'ous  in  re- 
gard to  the  future — by  anything  that 
gives  us  some  undefined  foreboding,  as 
we  are  by  that  which  is  really  formidable 
when  we  know  what  it  is.  In  the  latter 
case,  we  know  the  worst;  we  can  make 
some  preparation  for  it;  we  can  feel 
assured  that  when  that,  is  past,  all  is  past 
that  we  fear — but  who  can  guard  him- 
self, or  prepare  himself,  when  that  which 
is  dreaded  is  undefined  as  well  as  awful ; 
when  we  know  not  how  to  meet  it,  or  how 
long  it  may  endure,  or  how  terrific  and 
wide  may  be  the  sweep  of  its  desolation  ? 
^  And  his  coiuiteiiance  teas  chaiujed  in 
him,  Marg.,  brightnesses.  See  Notes  on 
ver.  6.  *l^  And  his  lords  tcere  astonied. 
Amazed.  The  Chaldee  word  means  to 
perplex,  disturb,  trouble.  They  were 
doubtless  as  much  perplexed  and  troubled 
as  the  king  himself. 

10.  Now  the  qvcen.  "Probably  the 
queen-mother,  the  Nitocris  of  Herodotus, 
as  the  king's  wives  were  at  the  entertain- 
ment." Winlde.  Comp.  vs.  2,  3.  So  Prof. 
Stuart.  The  editor  of  the  Pictorial  Bible 
also  supposes  that  this  was  the  queen- 
mother,  and  thinks  that  this  circumstance 
will  explain  her  familiarity  with  the  oc- 
currences in  the  reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar. 
He  says,  "We  are  informed  above,  that 
the  'wives  and  concubines'  of  the  king 
were  present  at  the  banquet.  It  there- 
fore seems  probable  that  the  'queen'  who 
now  first  appears,  was  the  queen-mother  ; 
and  this  probability  is  strengthened  by 
tlic  intimate  acquaintance  which  she  ex- 
hibits with  the  atiairs  of  Ncbuc'u:idnezzar's 
reign  ;  at  the  latter  end  of  which,  she,  as 
the  wife  of  Evil-Merodach,  who  was  re- 
gent during  his  father's  alienation  of 
mind,  took  an  active  part  in  the  internal 
policy  of  the  kingdom,  and  in  the  comple- 
tion of  the  great  works  which  Nebuchad- 
nezzar had  begun  in  Babylon.  This  she 
continued  during  the  reigns  of  her  hus- 
band and  son,  the  present  king  Belshaz- 
liir.  This  famous  queen,  Nitocris,  there- 
fore, could  not  but  bo  well  acquainted 
Vith  the  character  and  services  of  Dan- 


the  queen  spake  and  said,  0  king, 
live  for  ever :  let  not  thy  thought?, 
trouble  thee,  nor  let  thy  countenance 
be  changed : 

11  There  ''is  a  man  in  thy  king- 
dom, in  whom  is  the  spirit  of  the  holy 

be.  4.  8,9. 


iel."  On  the  place  and  influence  of  the 
queen-mother  in  the  Oriental  courts,  see 
Taylor's  Fragments  to  Calmet's  Diction- 
ary, No.  16.  From  the  extracts  which 
Ta3'lor  has  collected,  it  would  seem  that 
she  held  an  exalted  place  at  court,  and 
that  it  is  every  way  probable  that  she 
would  be  called  in,  or  would  come  in,  on 
such  an  occasion.  See  also  KnoUes'  His- 
tory of  the  Turks,  as  quoted  by  Taylor, 
Fragments,  No.  50.  ^  By  reason  of  the 
icords  of  the  king  and  his  lords.  Their 
words  of  amazement  and  astonishment. 
This  would  doubtless  be  conveyed  to  her, 
as  there  was  so  much  alarm  in  the  palace, 
and  as  there  was  a  summons  to  bring  in  the 
wise  men  of  Babylon.  If  her  residence 
was  in  some  part  of  the  palace  itself, 
nothing  would  be  more  natural  than  that 
she  should  be  made  acquainted  with  the 
unusual  occurrence,  or  if  her  residence 
was,  as  Taylor  supposes,  detached  from 
the  palace,  it  is  every  Avay  probable  that  she 
would  be  made  acquainted  with  the  con- 
sternation that  prevailed,  and  that  recol- 
lecting the  case  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and 
the  forgotten  services  of  Daniel,  she 
would  feel  that  the  information  whicb 
was  sought  respecting  the  mysterious 
writing  could  be  obtained  from  him. 
^  And  the  queen  spalce  and  said,  0  king 
live  for  ever.  A  common  salutation  in 
addressing  a  king,  expressive  of  a  desire 
of  his  happiness,  and  prosperity.  *i  -Let 
not  thtj  thovghts  tronhle  thee,  &c.  That 
is,  there  is  a  way  by  which  the  mystery 
may  be  solve^,  and  you  need  not,  there- 
fore, be  alarmed. 

11.  There  is  a  man  in  thij  kingdom.  To 
wit,  Daniel.  As  the  queen-mother  had 
lived  in  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and 
recollected  the  important  service  which 
he  had  rendered  in  interpreting  the  dream 
of  the  king,  it  was  natural  that  her  mind 
should  at  once  recur  to  him.  It  would 
seem,  also,  that  though  Daniel  was  no 
longer  emploj'ed  at  court,  yet  that  she 
still  had  an  acquaintance  with  him,  so 
far  at  least  as  to  know  that  he  was  acces- 
sible, and  might  be  called  in  on  this  oc- 


B.  C.  538.J 


CHAPTER  V. 


245 


gods  ;  and  in  the  days  of  thy  ^  father 
light  and  understandint;,  and  wisdom, 
like  the  wisdom  of  the  gods,  was 
found  iu  him ;  whom  the  king  Ne- 
buchadnezzar thy  '  father,  the  king, 
/  sai/,  thy  ^^  father,  made  master  of 
the  magicians,  astrologers,  Chal- 
deans, and  soothsayers. 

12  Forasmuch    as    an    excellent 

a  or,  grandfather,  ver.  2.  b  c.  6.  3. 

iasion.  It  may  be  asked,  perhaps,  how  it 
vas  that  Bftlshazzar  was  so  ignorant  of  all 
this  as  to  need  this  information  ?  For  it  is 
clear  from  the  question  which  the  king 
asks  in  ver.  13,  'Art  thou  that  Daniel?' 
tliat  he  was  ignorant  of  him  personally, 
and  prob.ably  even  of  his  services  as  an 
officer  in  the  court  of  Nebuchadnezzar. 
An  ingenious  and  not  improbable  solution 
of  this  difficulty  has  been  proposed  as 
founded  on  a  remark  of  Sir  John  Char- 
din  :  "  As  mentioned  by  the  queen,  Daniel 
had  been  made  by  Nebuchadnezzar  'mas- 
ter of  the  magicians,  astrologers,  Chal- 
deans, and  soothsayers.'  Of  this  employ- 
ment Chardin  conjectures  that  he  had 
been  deprived  on  the  death  of  the  king, 
and  obtains  this  conclusion  from  the  fact 
that  when  a  Persian  king  dies,  both  his 
astrologers  and  physicians  are  driven  from 
court— the  former  for  not  having  pre- 
dicted, and  the  latier  for  not  having  pre- 
vented, his  death.  If  such  was  the  eti- 
quette of  the  ancient  Babylonian,  as  it 
is  of  the  modern  Persian  court,  we  have 
certainly  a  most  satisfactory  solution  of 
the  present  difficulty,  as  Daniel  must  then 
be  supposed  to  have  relinquished  his  pre- 
sent emploj'ments,  and  to  have  lived  re- 
tired in  private  life  during  the  eight  years 
occupied  by  the  reigns  of  Evil-Merodach 
and  Bel^hazzar."  Harmar,  as  quoted  by 
Rosenmiiller,  {Moryenland,  on  Dan.  v.  13.) 
\  lit  tchom  is  the  spirit  of  the  holij  yods. 
This  is  language  such  as  a  heathen  would 
be  likely  to  use  when  speaking  of  one  who 
had  showed  extraordinary  knowledge  of 
divine  things.  See  Notes  on  cli.  iv.  9. 
^  And  in  the  days  of  thy  father.  Marg., 
grandfather.  See  Notes  on  vs.  1,  2, 
y^  Li(jhf,  and  vnderstandinrj,  and  iclsdom. 
Light  is  the  emblem  of  knowledge,  as  it 
makes  all  things  clear.  The  meaning 
here  is,  that  he  had  showed  extraordinary 
wisdom  in  interpreting  the  dream  of  Ne- 
buchadnezzar. ^  Like  the  wisdom  of  the 
21* 


b  spirit,  and  knowledge,  and  under- 
standing, <•  interpreting  of  dreams, 
and  showing  of  hard  sentences,  and 
d  dissolving  of  '  doubts,  were  found 
in  the  same  Daniel,  whom  the  king 
named  Belteshazzar :  now  lot  Dan- 
iel be  calhid,  and  he  will  show  the 
interpretation. 

"^  or,  of  an  interpreter.         d  or,  of  a  dissolitr. 
'^  knots. 


gods.  Such  as  the  gods  only  could  pos- 
sess. ^  When  the  king  Kehuehadnezzar 
thy  father,  the  king,  1  say,  thy  father,  made 
master  of  the  magicians,  &c.  See  ch. 
ii.  48.  This  is  repeated  here,  and  dwelt 
on,  in  order  to  call  the  attention  of  the 
king  to  the  fact  that  Daniel  was  worthy 
to  bo  consulted.  Though  now  living  in 
obscurity,  there  was  a  propriety  that  one 
who  had  been  placed  at  the  very  head  of 
the  wise  men  of  Babylon  by  a  prince  so 
distinguished  as  Nebuchadnezzar,  should 
be  consulted  on  the  present  occasion. 

12.  Forasmuch  as  an  excellent  spirit. 
Not  an  excellent  spirit  in  the  sense  in 
which  that  phrase  is  sometimes  used  now, 
as  denoting  a  good  and  pious  spirit,  but 
a  spirit  or  mind  that  excels ;  that  is,  that 
is  distinguished  for  wisdom  and  know- 
ledge, ^f  Interpreting  of  dreams.  Marg., 
'  or  an  interpreter.'  This  was  regarded 
as  a  great  attainment,  and  was  supposed 
to  prove  that  one  who  could  do  it  was  in- 
spired by  the  gods.  ^  And  showing  of 
hard  sentences.  The  meaning  of  enigma- 
tical or  obscure  sentences.  To  be  able  to 
do  this  was  supposed  to  indicate  great 
attainments,  and  was  a  knowledge  that 
was  much  coveted.  Comp.  Prov.  i.  6 : 
"  To  understand  a  proverb,  and  the  inter- 
pretation ;  the  words  of  the  wise,  and  their 
dark  sayings."  ^  And  dissolving  of  doubts. 
Marg.,  'or  a  dissolver'  of  'knots.'  So  the 
Chaldee.  This  language  is  still  common 
in  the  East,  to  denote  one  who  has  skill 
in  explaining  difficult  subjects.  "  In 
the  copy  of  a  patent  given  to  Sir  John 
Chardin  in  Persia,  we  tind  it  is  addressed 
'to  the  Lord  of  lords,  who  have  the  pres- 
ence of  a  lion,  the  aspect  of  Deston ;  the 
princes  who  have  the  statue  of  Tahem- 
ten-ten,  who  seem  to  be  in  the  time  of 
Ardevon,  the  regents  who  carry  the  ma- 
jesty of  Ferribours.  The  conquerors  of 
kingdoms.  Superintendents  that  unloose 
all  manner  of  knots,  and  who  are  under 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538. 


13  Then  was  Daniel  brought  in 
before  the  king.  And  the  king 
spake  and  said  unto  Daniel,  Art 
thou  that  Daniel,  which  art  of  the 
children  of  the  captivity  of  Judah, 
whom  the  king  my  ^  father  brouglit 
out  of  Jewry  ? 

1-1  I  have  even  heard  of  thee,  that 
the  spirit  of  the  gods  is  in  thee,  and 
that  light  and  understanding  and 
excellent  wisdom  is  found  in  thee. 

15  And  now  the  wise  7neii,  the 
istrologers,  have  been  brought  in 
before  me,  that  they  should  read 

»  or,  grandfather,  ver.  2. 


the  ascendant  of  Mercury,' "  Ac.  Taylor's 
Fragments  to  Calmet's  Diet.  No.  17-i. 
The  language  used  here  would  be  appli- 
cable to  the  explanation  of  any  difficult 
and  perplexing  subject.  ^  Whom  the 
king  named  Bclteahazzar.  That  is,  the 
name  was  given  to  him  by  his  authority, 
(see  Notes  on  ch.  i.  7,)  and  it  was  by  this 
name  that  he  called  him  when  he  ad- 
dressed him,  ch.  iv.  9. 

13.  Then  icas  Daniel  broit[/7it  in  he/ore 
the  king.  From  this  it  is  clear  that  he 
lived  in  Bab3'lon,  though  in  comparative 
obscurity.  It  would  seem  to  be  nut  im- 
probable that  he  was  still  known  to  the 
queen  mother,  who  perhaps  kept  up  an 
acquaintance  with  him  on  account  of  his 
former  services.  ^  Art  thou  that  Daniel. 
This  is  a  clear  proof  that  Belshazzar  was 
not  acquainted  personally  with  him.  See 
Notes  on  ver  11.  ^  Which  art  of  the 
children  of  the  captivity  of  Judah.  Be- 
longing to  those  of  Judah,  or  those  Jews 
who  were  made  captives,  and  who  reside 
in  Babylon.  See  Notes  on  ch.  i.  3.  lie 
could  not  be  ignorant  that  there  were 
Jews  in  his  kingdom,  though  he  was 
not  personally  acquainted  with  Daniel. 
^  Whom  the  king  mi/  father.  Marg.,  as  in 
vs.  2,  11,  grandfather.  *^  Brought  out  of 
Jewry  1     Out  of  Judea.     See  ch.  i.  1 — 3. 

14.  /  have  even  heard  of  thee,  &c., 
ver.  11. 

15.  And  now  the  ivise  men,  &c.,  vs.  7,  8. 

16.  And  I  have  heard  of  thee,  &c.,  ver. 
11.  ^  Canst  make  interpretations.  Marg., 
interpret.  Chald.,  'Interpret  interpreta- 
tions.' The  meaning  is,  that  he  was 
jkilled  in  interpreting  or  explaining 
ireamS;  omens,  &,q,  \  And  dissolve  doubts. 


this  writing,  and  make  known  unto 
me  the  interpretation  thereof:  but 
they  could  not  show  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  thing. 

16  And  I  have  heard  of  thee,  that 
thou  canst  ''make  interpretations, 
and  dissolve  doubts :  now  if  thou 
canst  read  the  writing,  and  make 
known  to  me  the  interpretation 
thereof,  thou  shalt  be  clothed  with 
scarlet,  and  have  a  chain  of  gold 
about  thy  neck,  and  shalt  be  the 
third  ruler  in  the  kingdom. 

17  f  Then  Daniel  answered  and 

b  interpret. 


Notes  on  ver.  12.  ^  Noio  ■if  thou  canst 
read  the  writing,  &c.,  thou  shalt  be  clothed 
tcith  scarlet,  &c.  This  was  the  reward 
which  at  the  first  he  had  promised  to  any 
one  that  was  able  to  do  it,  and  as  all 
others  had  failed,  he  was  willing  that  it 
should  be  offered  to  a  Jew. 

17.  Then  Daniel  answered  and  said 
before  the  king,  Let  thy  gifts  be  to  thyself. 
That  is,  '  I  do  not  desire  them  ;  I  do  not 
act  from  a  hope  of  reward.'  Daniel 
means  undoubtedly  to  intimate  that  what 
he  would  do  would  be  done  from  a  higher 
motive  than  a,  desire  of  office  or  honour. 
The  answer  is  one  that  is  eminently  dig- 
nified. Yet  he  says  ho  would  read  the 
writing,  implying  that  he  was  ready  to 
do  anything  that  would  be  gratifying  to 
the  monarch.  It  may  seem  somewhat 
strange  that  Daniel,  who  here  disclaimed 
all  desire  of  office  or  reward,  should  so 
soon  (ver.  29)  have  submitted  to  be 
clothed  in  this  manner,  and  to  have  re- 
ceived the  insignia  of  office.  But,  it  may 
be  remarked  that  when  the  offer  was  pro- 
posed to  him  he  stated  his  wishes,  and 
declared  that  he  did  not  desire  to  be  hon- 
oured in  that  way ;  when  he  had  per- 
formed the  duty,  however,  of  making 
known  the  writing,  he  could  scarcely  feel 
at  liberty  to  resist  a  command  of  the 
king  to  be  clothed  in  that  manner,  and 
to  be  regarded  as  an  officer  in  the  king- 
dom. His  intention,  in  the  verse  before 
us,  was  modestly  to  decline  the  honours 
proposed,  and  to  intimate  that  he  was 
not  influenced  by  a  desire  of  such  honours 
in  what  he  would  do ;  yet  to  the  king's 
command  afterwards  that  he  should  be 
clothed  in  robes  of  office,  he  could  not 


IJ.C.  538.1 


CHAPTER   V. 


217 


said  before  the  king,  Let  »thy  gifts 
be  to  thyself,  aud  give  thy  ^  rewards 
to  another  ;  yet  I  will  read  the  writ- 
ing <:unto  the  king,  and  make  known 
to  him  tlie  interpretation. 

18  0  thou  king,  the  most  high 
God  gave  Nebuchadnezzar  thj-  fa- 
ther a  kingdom,  aud  majesty,  and 
glory,  and  honour. 


with  propriety  make  resistance.  There 
is  no  evidence  that  he  tooli  these  honours 
voluntarily,  or  that  he  would  not  have 
cotitin'  ^  J  to  decline  them  if  he  could  have 
done  ii,  with  propriety.  ^  And  give  thy  re- 
wards to  aiivther.  Marg.,  'or  fee,  as  in  eh. 
ii.  6.'  Gesenius  supposes  that  the  word 
used  here — nsiaj — is  of  Persian  origin. 
It  means  a  gt/t,  and,  if  of  Persian  origin, 
is  derived  from  a  verb  meaning  to  load 
with  gifts  and  praises,  as  a  prince  does 
an  ambassador.  The  sense  here  seems 
to  be,  that  Daniel  was  not  disposed  to 
interfere  with  the  will  of  the  monarch  if 
he  chose  to  confer  gifts  and  rewards 
on  others,  or  to  question  the  propriety  of 
his  doing  so,  but  that,  so  far  as  he  was 
concerned,  he  had  no  desire  of  them  for 
himself,  and  could  not  be  influenced  by 
them  in  what  he  was  about  to  do.  ^  Yet 
I  loill  read  the  writing,  &a.  Expressing 
no  doubt  that  he  could  do  it  without  dif- 
ficult3%  Probabl}'  the  language  of  the 
writing  was  familiar  to  him,  and  he  at 
once  saw  that  there  was  no  difficulty,  in 
the  circumstances,  iu  determining  its 
meaning. 

18.  0  thou  Icing,  the  most  high  God 
gave  Nebuchadnezzar  thy  father  a  king- 
dom, &c.  This  reference  to  Nebuchad- 
nezzar is  evidently  designed  to  show  to 
Belshazzar  the  wickedness  of  his  own 
course,  and  the  reason  which  he  had  to 
apprehend  the  divine  vengeance  because 
he  had  not  learned  to  avoid  the  sins 
which  brought  so  great  calamities  upon 
his  predecessor.  As  he  was  acquainted 
with  what  had  occurred  to  Nebuchad- 
nezzar; as  he  had  doubtless  seen  the  pro- 
clamation which  he  had  made  on  his 
recovery  from  the  dreadful  malady  which 
God  had  brought  upon  him  for  his  pride ; 
and  as  te  had  not  humbled  him&elf,  but 
had  pursued  the  same  course  which  Ne- 
buchadnezzar did,  he  had  the  greater 
feason  to  apprehend  the  judgment  of 
heaven.    See  vs.   22,  23.     Daniel  here 


19  And  for  the  majesty  that  he 
gave  him,  all  ''people,  nations,  and 
languages,  trembled  and  feared  be- 
fore him  :  whom  he  would  he  slew  ; 
and  whom  he  would  he  kept  alive ; 
and  whom  he  would  he  set  up  ;  and 
whom  he  would  he  put  down. 


»  Ge.  14  23. 
<:  Ps.  119.  46. 


b  or,  fee,  as  c.  2.  0. 
dJe.  27.  7.    C.4.  22.  &c. 


traces  all  the  glory  which  Nebutbad- 
nezzar  had  to  '  the  most  high  God,'  re- 
minding the  king  that  whatever  honour 
and  majesty  he  had  he  was  equally  in- 
debted for  it  to  the  same  source,  and  that 
he  must  expect  a  similar  treatment  from 
him. 

19.  And  for  the  majesty  that  he  gave 
him.  That  is,  on  account  of  his  great- 
ness, referring  to  the  talents  which  God 
had  conferred  on  him,  and  the  power 
which  he  had  put  in  his  hands.  It 
was  so  great  that  all  people  and  nations 
trembled  before  him.  «[  -ill  2)eople,  na- 
tions, and  languages,  trembled  and  feared 
before  him.  Stood  in  awe  of  him.  On 
the  extent  of  his  empire,  see  Notes  on  ch. 
iii.  4,  iv.  1,  22.  ^  Whom  he  would  he 
slew,  &c.  That  is,  he  was  an  arbitrary — 
an  absolute  sovereign.  This  is  exactly 
descriptive  of  the  power  which  Oriental 
despotic  monarehs  have.  ^  Whomhe  would 
he  kept  alive.  AVhether  they  had,  or  had 
not,  been  guilty  of  crime.  He  had  the  ab- 
solute power  of  life  and  death  over  them. 
There  was  no  such  instrument  as  we  call  a 
'constitution'  to  control  the  sovereign  af 
well  as  the  people;  there  was  no  tribunal 
to  which  he  was  responsible,  and  no  law  by 
which  ho  was  bound  ;  there  were  no  judges 
to  determine  on  the  question  of  life  and 
death  in  regard  to  those  who  were  ac- 
cused of  crime,  whom  he  did  not  appoint, 
and  whom  he  might  not  remove,  and 
whose  judgments  ho  might  not  set  aside 
if  he  pleased;  there  were  no  'juries'  of 
'  peers'  to  determine  on  the  question  of 
fact  whether  an  accused  man  was  guilty 
or  not.  There  were  none  of  those  safe- 
guards v.hich  have  been  originated  to  pro- 
tect the  accused  in  modern  times,  and 
which  enter  so  essentially  into  the  no- 
tions of  liberty  now.  In  an  absolute  des- 
potism all  power  is  in  the  hands  of  one 
man,  and  this  was  in  fact  the  case  in 
Babylon.  ^  Whom  he  would  he  tet  up. 
That  is,  in  places  of  trust,  of  oflace,  of 


248 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  538. 


20  But  when  his  heart  was  lifted 
up,  and  his  mind  hardened  ""  in  pride, 
he  was  b  deposed  from  his  kingly 
throne,  and  they  took  his  glory  from 
him. 

21  And  ho  was  driven  from  the 
sons  of  men ;  and  "^  his  heart  was  made 
like  the  heasts,  and  his  dwelling  icas 
with  the  wild  asses :  they  fed  him 
,\ith  grass  like  oxen,  and  his  body 
vras  wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven  ;  till 
he  knew  that  the  most  high  God 
ruled  in  the  kingdom  of  men,  and 
tJiat  he  appointeth  over  it  whomso- 
ever he  will. 

'or,  tn  deal  proudly.  Ex.  18.  11.  ^made,  to 
come  down.  '^  or,  he  made  his  heart  equal.  d2ch. 
33.  23 ;  36. 12 ;  Ja.  4.  6.    ^  yer.  3, 4.    f  Ju.  16. 23. 


rank,  (fee.  ^  And  whom  he  would  he  pnt 
down.  No  matter  what  their  rank  or 
office. 

20.  But  lichen  his  heart  icas  lifted  up. 
See  eh.  iv.  .30.  ^  And  his  mind  hardened 
in  pride.  Marg.,  to  deal  proudly.  The 
state  of  mind  indicated  here  is  that  in 
■which  there  is  no  sense  of  dependence, 
but  where  one  feels  that  he  has  all  re- 
sources in  himself,  and  need  only  look 
to  himself.  ^  He  was  deposed  from  h  is 
kingly  throne.  Marg.,  made  to  come  doicn. 
That  is,  he  was  so  deposed  by  the  provi- 
dence of  God,  not  by  the  acts  of  his  own 
subjects. 

21.  And  he  ^cas  driven,  &e.  See  this 
fully  explained  in  ch.  iv.  25,  33. 

22.  And  thou  his  son,  0  Belshazzar, 
hast  not  humbled  thy  heart,  &c.  As  thou 
shouldst  have  done  in  remembrance  of 
these  events.  The  idea  is,  that  we  ought 
to  derive  valuable  lessons  from  what  has 
taken  place  in  past  times;  that,  from  the 
events  which  have  occurred  in  history, 
we  should  learn  what  God  approves  and 
what  he  disapproves ;  that  we  should 
avoid  the  course  which  has  subjected 
others  to  his  displeasure,  and  which  has 
brought  his  judgments  upon  them.  The 
course,  however,  which  Belshazzar  pur- 
sued has  been  that  of  kings  and  princes 
commonly  in  the  world,  and  indeed  of 
mankind  at  large.  llow  little  do  men 
profit  by  the  record  of  the  calamities 
which  have  come  upon  others  for  their 
crimes  !  How  little  are  the  intemperate 
of  one  generation  admonished  by  the  ca-J 
«mities  which  have  come  upon  those  of 


22  And  thou  his  son,  0  Belshaz> 
zar,  hast  not  humbled  ■*  thy  heart, 
though  thou  knewest  all  this  ; 

23  But  -'hast  lifted  up  thyself 
against  the  Lord  of  heaven  ;  and  they 
have  brought  the  vessels  of  his  houso 
before  thee,  and  thou,  and  thy  lords, 
thy  wives  and  thy  concubines,  have 
drunk  wine  in  them  ;  and  thou  hast 
f  praised  the  gods  of  silver  and  gold, 
of  brass,  iron,  wood,  and  stone, 
which  s  see  not,  nor  hear,  nor  know : 
and  the  God  in  whose  hand  thy 
^  breath  is,  and  whose  a?'e  all  thy 
i  ways,  hast  thou  not  J  glorified. 

gPs.  115.  5-8 ;  Ts.  37. 19.      h  Ac.  17.  28,  29. 
i  Je.  10.  23.  jllo.  1.21. 


another ;  how  little  are  the  devotees  of 
pleasure ;  how  little  are  those  in  places 
of  power  ! 

23.  But  hast  lifted  tip  thyself  against 
the  Lord  of  heaven.  The  God  who  had 
so  signally  rebuked  and  humbled  Nebu- 
chadnezzar. The  monarch  had  done  this, 
it  would  seem,  during  the  whole  of  his 
reign,  and  now  by  a  crowning  act  of  im- 
piety, he  had  evinced  special  disregard 
of  him,  and  contempt  for  him,  l>j'  pro- 
faning the  sacred  vessels  of  his  temple. 
^  Ajid  they  have  brought  the  vessels  of  his 
house  before  thee,  &c.  See  Notes  on  vs. 
2 — i.  ^  And  the  God  in  ichose  hand  thy 
breath  is.  Under  whose  power,  and  at 
whose  dispos.ll,  is  thy  life.  "While  you 
have  been  celebrating  the  praises  of  idol 
gods,  who  can  do  you  neither  good  nor 
evil,  j'ou  have  been  showing  special  con- 
tempt for  that  great  Being  who  keeps  you 
in  existence,  and  who  has  power  to  take 
away  your  life  at  any  moment.  What  is 
here  said  of  Belshazzar  is  true  of  all  men 
— high  and  low,  rich  and  poor,  bond  and 
free,  princes  and  people.  It  is  a  deeply 
affecting  consideration,  th.at  the  breath, 
on  which  our  life  depends,  and  which  is 
itself  so  frail  a  thing,  is  in  the  'hand '  of 
a  Being  who  is  invisible  to  us  ;  over  whom 
we  can  have  no  control;  who  can  arrest 
it  when  he  pleases  ;  who  has  given  us  no 
intimation  when  he  will  do  it,  and  who 
often  does  it  so  suddenly  as  to  defy  all 
previous  calculation  and  hope.  Nothing 
is  more  absolute  than  the  power  which 
God  holds  over  the  breath  of  men,  ye* 
there  is  nothing  which  is  less  recognized 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    V. 


249 


24  Then  was  the  part  of  the  hand  |  25  ^  And  this  is  the  Tcriting  that 
sent  from  him;  and  this  writing  was  written,  MENE,  MENE,  TE- 
was  written.  I  KEL,  UPIIAllSIN, 


thai  that  power,  and  nothing  which  men 
are  less  disposed  to  acknowledge  than  their 
dependence  on  him  for  it.  ^[  And  whose 
are  all  thy  ways.  That  is,  he  has  power 
to  control  thee  in  all  thy  ways.  You  can 
go  nowhere  without  hi?  permission  ;  you 
can  never,  when  abroad,  return  to  your 
home  without  the  direction  of  his  Provi- 
dence. What  is  here  said,  also,  is  as  true 
of  all  others  as  it  was  of  the  Chuldean 
prince.  '•  It  is  not  in  man  that  walketh 
to  direct  his  steps."  "  A  man's  heart  de- 
viseth  his  way,  but  the  Lord  directcth  his 
steps."  None  of  us  can  take  a  step  with- 
out his  permission  ;  none  can  go  forth  on 
a  journey  to  a  distant  land  without  his 
constant  superintending  care;  none  can 
return  without  his  favour.  And  yet  how 
little  is  this  recognized!  How  few  feel 
it  when  they  go  out  and  come  in  ;  when 
they  go  forth  to  their  daily  emploj'ments  ; 
when  they  start  on  a  voyage  or  journey  ; 
when  they  propose  to  return  to  their 
homes  I  ^  Hast  thou  not  r/hrijied.  That 
is,  thou  hast  not  honoured  him  by  a  suita- 
ble acknowledgment  of  dependence  on 
him. 

24.  Then  was  the  part  of  the  hand  sent 
from  him.  To  wit,  the  fingers.  See  ver.  5. 
The  sense  is,  that  when  it  was  fully  per- 
ceived that  Belshazzar  was  not  disposed 
to  learn  that  there  was  a  God  in  heaven  ; 
when  he  refused  to  profit  by  the  solemn 
dispensations  which  had  occurred  in  re- 
spect to  his  predecessor;  when  his  own 
heart  was  lifted  up  with  pride,  and  when 
he  had  gone  even  farther  than  his  prede- 
cessors had  done  by  the  sacrilegious  use 
of  the  vessels  of  the  temple,  thus  showing 
especial  contempt  for  the  God  of  heaven, 
then  appeared  the  mysterious  hand-writ- 
ing on  the  wall.  It  was  then  an  appro- 
priate time  for  the  Most  High  God,  who 
had  been  thus  contemned  and  insulted, 
to  come  forth  and  rebuke  the  proud  and 
the  impious  monarch. 

25.  And  this  is  the  icriting  that  teas 
written.  The  Babylonians,  it  would 
seem,  were  unacquainted  with  the  charac- 
ters that  were  used,  and  of  course  unable 
to  understand  the  meaning.  See  ver.  8. 
The  first  thing,  therefore,  for  Daniel  to  do 
Was  to  read  the  writing,  and  this  ho  was 
ible  to  do  without  difficulty,  probably,  as 


already  remarked,  because  it  was  in  the 
ancient  Hebrew  character — a  character 
quite  familiar  to  him,  though  not  known 
to  the  Babylonians  whom  Belshazzar  con- 
sulted. It  is  every  way  probable  that 
that  character  trould  he  used  on  an  occa- 
sion like  this,  for  («)  it  is  manifest  that  it 
was  intended  that  the  true  God,  the  God 
of  the  Hebrews,  should  be  made  known, 
and  this  was  the  character  in  which  his 
communications  had  been  made  to  men ; 
(6)  it  was  clearly  the  design  to  honour 
his  own  religion,  and  it  is  morally  certain 
that  tiicre  would  be  something  which  would 
show  the  connection  between  this  occur- 
rence and  his  own  agency,  and  nothing 
would  do  this  better  than  to  make  use  of 
such  a  character;  and  (c)  it  was  the  di- 
vine intention  to  put  honour  on  Daniel, 
and  this  would  be  well  done  by  making 
use  of  a  character  which  he  understood. 
There  have  been,  indeed,  many  conjec- 
tures respecting  the  characters  which 
were  employed  on  this  occasion,  and  the 
reasons  of  the  difficulty  of  interpreting 
the  words  used,  but  it  is  most  probable 
that  the  above  is  the  true  statement,  and 
this  will  relieve  all  the  difficulties  in  re- 
gard to  the  account.  Prideau.x  supposes 
that  the  characters  employed  were  the 
ancient  Phoenician  characters,  that  were 
used  by  the  Hebrews,  and  that  are  found 
now  in  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch ;  and 
that,  as  above  suggested,  these  might  be 
unknown  to  the  Babj'lonians,  though  fa- 
miliar to  Daniel.  Others  have  supposed 
that  the  characters  were  those  in  common 
use  in  Babylon,  and  that  the  reason  why 
the  Babylonians  could  not  read  them  was 
that  they  were  smitten  with  a  sudden 
blindness,  like  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom, 
Gen.  xix.  11.  The  Talmudists  suppose 
that  the  words  were  written  in  a  caba- 
listic manner,  in  which  certain  letters 
were  used  to  stand  for  other  letters,  on 
the  principle  referred  to  by  Buxtorf  (Lex. 
Chal.  Rabb.  et  Talm.  p.  248),  and  known 
as  ^orN — that  is,  where  the  alphabet  is 
reversed,  and  ^  (A)  is  used  for  n  (T), 
3  (B)  for  ii*  (S);  'S;c.,  and  that  on  account 
of  this  cabalistic  transmutation  the  Baby- 
lonians could  not  read  it,  though  Dan- 
iel  might  have  been  familiar  with  that 
mode  of  writing.     Rabbi  Jochjinan  sup- 


250 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  538. 


26  This  is  tho  interpretation  of 
the  thing:  MENE  ;  God  hath  num- 


posed  that  there  was  a  change  of  the  order 
in  which  the  letters  of  the  words  were 
written;  other  Rabbins  that  there  was  a 
change  merely  in  the  order  of  the  first  and 
second  letters;  others,  that  the  words 
were  written  backwards;  others,  that  the 
words  were  written,  not  in  the  usual 
horizontal  manner,  but  perpendicularly; 
and  others,  that  the  words  were  not  writ- 
ten in  full,  but  that  only  the  first  letters 
of  each  were  written.  See  Bertholdt,  pp. 
349,  350.  All  these  are  mere  conjectures, 
and  most  of  them  are  childish  and  impro- 
balsle  suppositions.  There  is  no  real 
difficulty  in  the  case  if  we  suppose  that 
the  words  were  written  in  a  character  fami- 
liar to  Daniel,  but  not  familiar  to  the  Baby- 
lonians. Or,  if  this  is  not  admitted,  then  we 
may  suppose  that  some  mere  marks  were 
employed  whose  signification  was  made 
known  to  Daniel  in  a  miraculous  manner. 
26.  This  is  the  interprctntion  of  the 
thing.  It  may  seem  not  to  have  been 
difiicult  to  interpret  the  meaning  of  the 
communication  when  one  was  able  to 
read  the  words,  or  when  the  sense  of  the 
words  was  understood.  But,  if  the  words 
are  placed  together,  and  considered  in 
their  abstract  form,  the  whole  communi- 
cation would  be  so  enigmatical  that  the 
interpretation  would  not  be  likely  to  oc- 
cur to  any  one  without  a  divine  guidance. 
This  will  appear  more  clearly  by  arrang- 
ing the  words  together,  as  has  been  done 
by  Hales : 

MENE,         I\IENE,         TEKEL, 

NUMBER,  NUMBER,  WEIGHT, 

[PERES]  UPHARSIN. 

[division]  divisions  ; 

»r,  as  it  is  explained  more  accurately  by 
Bertholdt  and  Gesenius, 

Mene,  Mciie,        Tehel,      Ujihaisin, 

Numbered,   Kumhered,   Weighed,     Divided. 

From  this  arrangement,  it  will  be  at  once 
eeen  that  the  interpretation  proposed  by 
Daniel  was  not  one  that  would  have  been 
likely  to  have  occurred  to  any  one. 
^  Mene — N:p.  This  word  is  a  participle 
passive  from  nap  to  nvmher,  to  review. 
fiegdnius,  Lex.     The  verb  is  also  written 


bered   thy   kingdom    and    finished 
it. 


^<;n.  Buxtorf,  Lej-.  It  would  bo  liter- 
ally translated  numhcred,  and  would  ap- 
ply to  that  of  which  an  estimate  was 
taken  by  counting.  AYe  use  now  an  ex- 
pression which  would  convey  a  similar 
idea,  when  we  say  of  one  that  'his  days 
are  numbered;'  that  is,  he  has  not  long 
to  live,  or  is  about  to  die.  The  idea 
seems  to  be  taken  from  the  fact  that  the 
duration  of  a  man's  life  cannot  usually  be 
known,  and  in  the  general  uncertainty 
we  can  form  no  correct  estimate  of  it, 
but  when  he  is  old,  or  when  he  is 
dangerously  sick,  we  feel  that  we  can 
with  some  degree  of  probability  number 
his  days,  since  he  cannot  now  live  long. 
Such  is  the  idea  here,  as  e.xplained  by 
Daniel.  All  uncertainty  about  the  dura- 
tion of  the  kingdom  was  now  removed, 
for,  since  the  evil  had  come,  an  exact 
estimate  of  its  whole  duration — of  the  num- 
ber of  the  years  of  its  continuance — 
could  be  made.  In  the  Greek  of  Theo- 
dotion  there  is  no  attempt  to  translate 
this  word,  and  it  is  retained  in  Greek 
letters — .Mai^i).  So  also  in  the  Codex 
Chis.,  and  in  the  Latin  Vulgate.  ^  God 
hath  numbered  thy  kingdom.  The  word 
which  is  used  here,  and  rendered  nitm- 
bered — n^a — is  the  verb  of  which  the 
previous  word  is  the  participle.  Daniel 
applies  it  to  the  kingdom  or  reign  of  the 
monarch,  as  being  a  thing  of  more  im- 
portance than  the  life  of  the  king  him- 
self. It  is  evident,  if,  according  to  the 
common  interpretation  of  ver.  30,  Bel- 
shazzar  was  slain  that  very  night,  it 
might  have  been  applied  to  the  king  him- 
self, meaning  that  his  days  were  num- 
bered, and  that  he  was  about  to  die. 
But  this  interpretation  (see  Notes)  is  not 
absolutely  certain,  and  perhaps   the  fact 

:  that  Daniel  did  not  so  apply  the  word  may 
be  properly  regarded  as  one  circumstance 
showing  that  such  an  interpretation  is 
not  necessary,  though  probably  it  is  the 
correct  one.  ^  And  finished  it.  This 
is  not   the  meaning  of   the  word  3fene, 

,  but  is  the  explanation  by  Daniel  of  the 
thing  intended.  The  word  in  its  interpre- 
tation fairly  implied  that;  or  that  might 
be  understood  from  it.  The  fact  that  the 
'kingdom'  in  its  duration  was  'numbered,' 
properly  expressed  the  idea  that  it  was 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    V, 


251 


27  TEKEL ;    Thou  art  weighed 

»  Job.  31.  6.    Va.  62.  9.  b  Mat.  22. 11, 12. 

1  Co.  3. 13. 

now  to  come  to  an  end.  It  did  actually 
then  come  to  an  end  by  being  merged  in 
that  of  the  Modes  and  Persians. 

27.  Tckel.  This  word — Sp.l — is  also, 
according  to  Gesenius,  a  passive  parti- 
ciple (from  7|2n,  to  poise,  to  wei<jli,)  and 
means  tcei<jJied.  It  would  be  used  with 
»eferenco  to  anything  placed  in  a  balance 
to  ascertain  its  weight;  and  hence,  like 
the  word  mcns}ire,  would  denote  that 
the  extent,  dimensions,  true  worth,  or 
character  of  anything  was  ascertained. 
As  by  the  use  of  scales  the  weight  of 
ftnj'thing  is  known,  so  the  word  is  ap- 
plied to  any  estimate  of  character  or 
of  actions,  and  a  balance  becomes  the 
emblem  of  justice.  Thus  God,  in  his 
judgments  of  men,  is  represented  as 
wci'jkiug    their    actions.    1    Sam.   ii.  3. 


^in    the  balances,   and  art    found 
^  wantin"-. 


"  The  Lord  is  a  God  of  knowledge,  and 
by  him  actions  are  weighed."  Comp. 
Job  vi.  2, 

"  Oh  that  my  grief  were  thoroupjhly  weighed. 
And  my  calamity  laid  in  the  balance  together." 

Job  xxxi.  6, 

"  Let  me  he  weighed  in  an  even  balance. 
That  God  may  know  mine  integrity." 

The  balance  thus  used  to  denote  judg- 
ment in  this  life,  became  also  the  emblem 
of  judgment  in  the  future  state,  when  the 
conduct  of  men  will  be  accurately  esti- 
mated, and  justice  dealt  out  to  them 
according  to  the  strict  rules  of  equity. 
To  illustnate  this,  I  will  insert  a  copy  of 
an  Egyptian  '  Death  Judgment,'  with  the 
remarks  of  the  Editor  of  the  Pictorial 
Bible  in  regard  to  it.    "  The  Egyptians  on. 


ANCIENT   EGYPTIAX    DEATH    JUDGMENT. 


ertained  the  belief  that  the  actions  of  the 
;»eud  were  solemnly  weighed  in  balances 
jefore  Osiris,  and  that  the  condition  of 
iho  departed  was  determined  according 
to  the  preponderance  of  good  or  evil. 
Such  judgment  scenes  .are  very  frequently 
represented  in  the  paintings  and  papyri 
of  ancient  Egypt,  and  one  of  them  we 
have  copied  as  a  suitable  illustration  of 
the  present  subject.  One  of  these  scenes, 
as  represented  on  the  walls  of  a  sm.all 
temple  at  Dayr-el-Medeeneh,  has  been 
so  well  explained  by  Mr.  Wilkinson,  that 
we  shall  avail  ourselves  of  his  descrip- 
tion ;  for  although  that  to  which  it  refers 
is  somewhat  different  from  the  one  which 
we  have  engraved,  his  account  affords  an 
adequate  elucidation  of  all  that  ours  con- 
kains.  'Osiris,  seated  on  his  throne, 
iwaita  the  arrival  of  those  souls  tLat  are 


ushered  into  Amenti.  The  four  genii 
stand  before  him  on  a  lotus-blossom  [ours 
has  the  lotus  without  the  genii,]  the  female 
Cerberus  sits  behind  them,  and  Harpoc- 
rates  on  the  crook  of  Osiris.  Thoth,  the 
god  of  letters,  arrives  in  the  presence  of 
Osiris  bearing  in  his  hand  a  tablet,  on 
which  the  actions  of  the  deceased  are 
noted  down,  while  Horus  and  Arceris  are 
employed  in  weighing  the  good  deeds* 
of  the  judged  against  the  ostrich  feather, 
the  symbol  of  truth  and  justice.  A  cyno- 
cepl  alus,  the  emblem  of  truth,  is  seated 
on  the  top  of  the  balance.  At  length 
arrives  the  deceased,  who  appears  between 
two  figures  of  the  goddess,  and  bears  In 

*  "  This  M.  Champolllon  supposes  tft  be  the 
heart.  I  still  incline  to  the  construction  I 
have  put  upon  it — a  type  6f  the  good  actlona 
of  the  deceased;'' 


252 


DANIEL, 


IB.  C.  538 


bis  hand  the  symbol  of  truth,*  indicating 
his  meritorious  actions,  and  his  fitness  for 
admission  to  the  presence  of  Osiris.' 

"If  the  Babylonians  entertained  a  simi- 
lar notion,  the  declaration  of  the  prophet, 
'Thou  art  weighed  in  the  balances,  and 
art  found  wanting  !'  must  have  appeared 
exceedingly  awful  to  them.  But  again, 
there  are  allusions  in  this  declaration  to 
some  such  custom  of  literally  weighing 
the  royal  person,  as  is  described  in  the 
following  passage  in  the  account  of  Sir 
Thomas  Roe's  embassy  to  the  Great  Mo- 
gul : — '  The  first  of  September,  (which 
was  the  late  Mogul's  birth-day,)  he,  re- 
taining an  ancient  yearly  custom,  was, 
in  the  presence  of  his  chief  grandees, 
weighed  in  a  balance  :  the  ceremony  was 
performed  within  his  house,  or  tent,  in  a 
fair  spacious  room,  whereinto  none  were 
admitted  but  by  special  leave.  The  scales 
in  which  he  was  thus  weighed  were  plated 
with  gold;  and  so  was  the  beam,  on 
which  they  hung  by  great  chains,  made 
likewise  of  that  most  precious  metal. 
The  king,  sitting  in  one  of  them,  was 
weighed  first  against  silver  coin,  which 
immediately  afterwards  was  distributed 
among  the  poor;  then  was  he  weighed 
against  gold ;  after  that  against  jewels 
(as  they  say,)  but  I  observed  (being  there 
present  with  my  ambassador)  that  he  was 
weighed  against  three  several  things, 
laid  in  silken  bags  in  the  contrary  scale. 


When  I  saw  him  in  the  balance,  I  thought 
on  Belshazzar,  who  was  found  too  light. 
By  his   weight  (of  which  his  physicians 


ANCIENT   EGYPTIAN    SCALES. 

yearly  keep  an  exact  account,)  they  pre- 
sume to  guess  of  the  present  state  of  his 
body,  of  which  they  speak  flatteringly, 
however  they  think  it  to  be." 


SCALES. — FROM   AN   EGYPTIAN   PAINTING   ENGRAVED   IN   ROSELLINI. 


The  cut  on  page  253  from  the  Sarcopha- 
gus of  Alexander,  will  further  show  how 
commonly  this  opinion  prevailed,  and 
how  natural  is  the  representation  here. 
If  the  Babylonians  entertained  such 
notions    in    regard   to   the  dead  as   are 

*  '■  Sometimes,  instead  of  the  ostrich-feather, 
the  deceased  bears  a  vase  (which  is  placed  in 
the  other  scale,)  and  it  has  then  a  similar  im- 
port" 


here  represented,  the  declaration  made 
by  the  prophet  must  have  been  exceed- 
ingly solemn.  But  whether  this  were  so 
or  not,  the  language  of  Daniel  in  inter- 
preting the  word,  must  have  been  over- 
whelming to  the  monarch.  It  could  be 
understood  by  him  as  denoting  nothing 
less  than  that  a  solemn  sentence  had 
been  passed  upon  his  ehcracter  and  con. 
duct  by  the  great  Judge  of  all,  and  that 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    V. 


259 


28  PERES;  Tliy  kingdom  is  di- 1 vided,  and   given   »to  the   '•Medea 
.Foretold,  Is.  21.  2.       ",„,  ,i        „o  r,  9^    land  c  Persians. 


DEATH,  JUDGMENT,  ETC.,  FROJI  THE  SARCOPHAGUS  OF  ALEXANDER. 


h«  was  found  to  have  failed  in  the  re- 
quirements which  had  been  made  of  him, 
and  was  now  condemned.  lie  had  no 
righteousness  when  his  actions  came  to 
be  estimated  as  in  a  balance,  and  no- 
thing awaited  him  but  an  awful  con- 
demnation. Who  is  there  now  who  would 
not  tremble  at  seeing  the  word  Tekel — 
weighed — written  on  the  wall  of  his  cham- 
ber at  midnight?  ^  Thou  art  tceighed  in 
the  balances.  That  is,  this,  in  the  cir- 
cumstances, is  the  proper  interpretation 
of  this  word.  It  would  apply  to  any- 
thing whose  value  was  ascertained  by 
Weighing  it ;  but  as  the  reference  here 
was  to  the  king  of  Babylon,  and  as  the 
whole  representation  was  designed  for 
him,  Daniel  distinctly  applies  it  to  him  : 
'thou  art  weighed.'  On  the  use  and  ap- 
plication of  this  language,  see  1  Sam.  ii. 
3,  "The  Lord  is  a  God  of  knowledge,  and 
by  him  actions  iire  weighed."  Comp.  also 
Job  x.xxi.  6;  Prov.  xvi.  2,  11.  *^  And 
art  found  wanting.  This  is  added,  like 
the  previous  phrase,  as  an  explanation. 
Even  if  the  word  could  have  been  read 
by  the  Chaldeans,  yet  its  moaning  could 
not  have  been  understood  without  a 
divine  communication,  for  though  it  were 
22 


supposed  to  be  applicable  to  the  monarch, 
it  would  still  be  a  question  what  the  re- 
sult of  the  weighing  or  trial  would  be. 
That  could  have  been  known  to  Daniel 
only  by  a  communication  from  on  high. 

28.  Peres.  In  ver.  25  this  is  Uphar- 
sin.  These  are  but  different  forms  of  the 
same  word — the  word  in  ver.  25  being  in 
the  plural,  and  here  in  the  singular. 
The  verb  (D^p)  means  to  divide,  and  in 
this  form,  as  in  the  previous  cases,  it  is, 
according  to  Gesenius,  a  participle,  mean- 
ing divided.  As  it  stands  here,  it  would 
be  applicable  to  anything  that  was  divided 
or  sundered — whether  a  kingdom,  a  pal- 
ace, a  house,  a  territory,  <to.  What  was 
divided,  could  be  known  only  by  divine 
revelation.  If  the  word  had  been  un- 
derstood by  Belshazzar,  undoubtedly  it 
would  have  suggested  the  idea  that  there 
was  to  be  some  sort  of  division  or  sunder- 
ing, but  what  that  was  to  be  would  not  be 
indicated  by  the  mere  use  of  the  word. 
Perhaps  to  an  affrighted  imagination 
there  might  have  been  conveyed  the  idea 
that  there  would  be  a  revolt  in  some  of 
the  provinces  of  the  empire,  and  that  a 
part  would  be  rent  away,  but  it  would 
not  have  occurred  that  it  would  be  so  rent 


254 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538 


29  Then  commanded  Belshazzar, 
and  they  clothed  Daniel  Tvith  scar- 
let, and  p?(<  a  chain  of  gold  about 
his  neck,  and  made  a  proclamation 


concerning  him,  that  =  he  should  bo 
the  third  ruler  in  the  kingdom. 

30  ^  In  that  night  b  was  Belshaz- 
zar the  king  of  the  Chaldeans  slain, 
aver.  7.  ''Je.51.  31,  39. 


that  the  whole  would  pass  under  the  do-  i  one  person  as  another,  and  in  the  palacea 
minion    of  a   foreign   power.      Josephus   of  kings  such  garments  were  always  on 


(Ant.  B.  X.  ch.  xi.  ^  3)  says,  that  the 
word  "Phares  in  the  Greek  tongue  means 
a  fragment — K\aa(ia — God  will,  therefore, 
break  thy  kingdom  in  pieces,  and  divide 
it  among  the  Medes  and  Persians."  ^  Thy 
kingdom  is  divided.  That  is,  the  proper 
interpretation  of  this  communication  is, 
that  the  kingdom  is  about  to  be  rent 
asunder,  or  broken  into  fragments.     It  is 


hand.  Sec  llarmar's  Observations  in  the 
East,  vol.  ii.  392,  seq.  Comp.  Rosen miiUer, 
Morgenland,  in  loc.  ^  That  he  should  be 
the  third  rider,  &c.  See  Notes  on  ver.  7. 
30.  In  that  night  was  Belshazzar  the 
king  of  the  Chaldeans  slain.  On  the  tak- 
ing of  Babylon,  and  the  consequences, 
see  Notes  on  Isa.  xiii.  17 — 22,  and  ch. 
xlv.  1,  2.     The  account  which  Xenophon 


to  be  separated  or  torn  from  the  dynasty  (Cyrop.  vii.  L)  gives  of  the  taking  of 
that  has  ruled  over  it,  and  to  be  given  to  \  iJabylon,  and  of  the  death  of  the  king — 
another.  ^  And  given  to  the  Medes  and  though  without  mentioning  his  name, 
Persians.  On  this  united  kingdon,  see  '  agrees  so  well  with  the  statement  here, 
Notes  on  Isa.  xiii.  17.  It  was  given  to  that  it  may  be  regarded  as  a  strong  con- 
the  Medes  and  Persians  when  it  was  firraation  of  its  correctness.  After  de- 
taken  by  Cyrus,  and  when  the  kingdom  of  I  scribing  the  preparation  made  to  take  the 
Babylon  became  extinct,  and  thencefor-  city  by  draining  off  the  waters  of  the 
ward  became  a  part  of  the  Medo-Persian  Euphrates  so  as  to  leave  the  channel  dry 
empire.  See  Notes  on  Isa.  xiii.  17,  19.  j  beneath  the  walls  for  the  army  of  Cyrus, 
29.  Then  commanded  Belshazzar.  In  and  after  recording  the  charge  which 
compliance  with  his  promise,  ver.  16.  |  Cyrus  gave  to  his  generals  Gadates  and 
Though  the  interpretation  had  been  so  i  Gobryas,  he  adds,  "And  indeed  those 
fearful  in  its  import,  and  though  Daniel ,  '"^°  were  with  Gobryas  said  that  it  would 
had  been  so  plain  and  faithful  with  him,  \  not  be  wonderful  if  the  gates  of  the  pal- 
yet  he  did  not  hesitate  to  fulfil  his  pro-  ace  should  be  found  open,  as  the  tvhole 
mise.  It  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  the  ,  ^''1/  *f'"f  night  seemed-  to  be  given  up  to 
result  of  fidelity,  that  a  proud  monarch  '  revelry" — wj  h  KMynf  yap  Sokci  h  ttoAi;  raaa 
should  have  received  such  a  reproof,  and  i  clvat  riik  rrj  wkti.  He  then  says  that  as 
such  a  prediction  in  this  manner,  and  they  passed  on,  after  entering  the  city, 
it  is  an  encouragement  to  us  to  do  our  "of  those  whom  they  encountered,  part 
duty,  and  to  state  the  truth  plainly  to  being  smitten  died,  part  fled  again  back, 
wicked  men.  Their  own  consciences  tes-  \  and  part  raised  a  clamor.  But  those  who 
tify  to  them  that  it  is  the  truth,  and  they  j  were  with  Gobryas  also  raised  a  clamor 
will    see   the   truth  so  clearly  that  they,  as  if  they  also  joined  in  the  revelry,  and 


cannot  deny  it.  ^  And  they  clothed 
l)aniel  ivith  scarlet,  &c.  All  this,  it 
would  seem,  was  transacted  in  a  single 
aight,  and  it  has  been  made  an  objection, 
as  above  remarked,  to  the  authenticity 
of  the  book,  that  such  events  are  said  to 


going  as  fast  as  they  could,  thej'  came 
soon  to  the  palace  of  the  king.  But  those 
who  were  with  Gobryas  and  Gadates 
being  arrayed,  found  the  gates  of  the 
palace  closed,  but  those  who  were  ap- 
pointed  to  go  against  the  guard  of  the 


have  occurred  in  so  short  a  space  of  time,  palace  fell  upon  them  when  drinkin^ 
and  that  Daniel  should  have  been  so  soon  ,  before  a  great  light,  and  were  quickly 
clothed  with  the  robes  of  ofiice.  On  this  ;  engaged  with  them  in  hostile  combat, 
objection,  see  Intro,  to  the  chapter,  i  Then  a  cry  arose,  and  they  who  were 
^  1.  II.  In  respect  to  the  latter  part  of  within  having  asked  the  cause  of  the 
the  objection,  it  may  be  here  further  re-  tumult,  the  king  commanded  ihem  to  see 
marked,  that  it  was  not  necessary  to  fit  what  the  affair  was,  and  some  of  them 
him  with  a  suit  of  clothes  made  expressly  j  rushing  out  opened  the  gates.  Ai  they 
for  the  occasion,  for  the  loose,  flowing  robes  who  were  with  Gadates  saw  the  gates 
«f  the  Orientals  were  as  well  adapted  to  j  open,  they  rushed  in,  and  pursuing  those 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER   V. 


865 


31  And  Darius  a  the  Median  took 
*  c.  9. 1.        I'  he  as  the  son  of.         <=  or,  now. 


the  kingdom,  '^^  being  « about  tbree* 
score  and  two  years  old. 


■who  attempted  to  return,  and  smit- 
ing them,  they  came  to  the  king,  and 
they  found  him  standing  with  a  drawn 
sabre — dKivaKriy.  And  those  who  were 
with  Gadates  and  Gobryas  overpowered 
him — ix^ipovfTo — and  those  who  were  with 
him  were  slain — one  opposing,  and  one 
fleeing,  and  one  seeking  his  safety  in  the 
best  way  he  could.  And  Cyrus  sent  cer- 
tain of  his  horsemen  away,  and  com- 
manded that  they  should  put  to  death 
those  whom  they  found  out  of  their  dwel- 
lingi-,  but  that  those  who  were  in  their 
houses,  and  could  speak  the  Syriac  lan- 
guage, should  be  suffered  to  remain,  but 
that  whosoever  should  be  found  without 
ghould  be  put  to  death. 

"  These  things  they  did.  But  Gadates 
and  Gobr3'as  came  up ;  and  first  they 
rendered  thanks  to  the  gods  because  they 
had  taken  vengeance  on  the  impious 
king — on  TCTijxupriiiciioi  fj(Tai'  tov  di'i'iaiou 
fiaaiXia.  Then  they  kissed  the  hands 
and  feet  of  Cyrus,  weeping  with  jo_y,  and 
rejoicing.  When  it  was  day,  and  they 
who  had  the  watch  over  the  towers 
learned  that  the  city  was  taken,  and  that 
the  king  iras  dead — lov  (iaaiKia  TcSfriKOra — 
the}'  also  surrendered  the  towers."  These 
extracts  from  Xenophon  abundantly  con- 
firm what  is  here  said  in  Daniel  respect- 
ing the  death  of  the  king,  and  will  more 
than  neutralize  what  is  said  by  Berosus. 
See  Intro,  to  the  chapter,  |  2. 

31.  And  Darius  the  3/edian  took  the 
kingdom.  The  city  and  kingdom  were 
actually  taken  by  Ci/nw,  though  acting  in 
the  name  and  by  the  authority  of  Darius, 
or  Cyaxares,  who  was  his  uncle.  For  a 
full  explanation  of  the  conquests  of  Cyrus, 
and  of  the  reason  why  the  city  is  said  to 
have  been  taken  by  Darius,  see  Notes  on 
Isa.  xli.  2.  In  regard  to  the  question 
who  Darius  the  Median  was,  see  the 
Introduction  to  cb.  vi.  g  2.  The  name 
Darius — '>^'1\1"3j  or  Darjaiesh,  is  the  name 
under  which  the  three  Medo-Persian 
kings  are  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. There  is  some  difference  of  opin- 
ion as  to  its  meaning.  Herodotus  (vi. 
98)  says,  that  it  is  equivalent  to  iplim, 
one  who   restrains,   but  Hesychius    says 


that  it  is  the  same  as  (/jpoi'i/ioj — p'udent, 
Grotefend,  who  has  found  it  in  the  cuni- 
form  inscriptions  at  Persepolis,  as  Dar- 
heush,  or  Darjeush  (Heeren's  Ideen,  i.  2, 
p.  .350,)  makes  it  to  be  a  compound  word, 
the  first  part  being  an  abbreviation  of 
Dara,  'Lord,'  and  the  latter  portion 
coming  from  kshah,  '  king.'  Pt.  Martin 
reads  the  name  as  Dnreioiisch  Vyschtaa- 
ponea  on  the  Persepolitan  inscriptions; 
that  is,  Darius,  son  of  Vishtaspo.  Laa- 
sen,  however,  gives  Darhawns  Vistaspctha, 
the  latter  word  being  equivalent  to  the 
Gustasp>  of  the  modern  Persian,  and 
meaning  'one  whose  employment  is 
about  horses.'  See  Anthon,  Class.  Diet., 
and  Kitto's  Cyclo.  Art.  Darius.  Comp. 
Niehbuhr's  Reisebeschr.  Part  ii.  Tab.  24, 
G,,  and  B.  Gesenius,  Lex.  This  Darius  is 
supposed  to  be  Cyaxares  II.  (In  tro.  to  eh.  vi. 
^  2,)  the  son  and  successor  of  Astyages, 
the  uncle  and  father-in-law  of  Cyrus,  who 
held  the  empire  of  Media  between  Asty- 
ages and  Cyrus,  B.  C.  569—536.  If  Being. 
Marg.  '  He  as  son  of.'  The  marginal  read- 
ing is  in  accordance  with  the  Chaldee — 
ng^.  It  is  not  unusual  in  the  language  of 
the  Orientals  to  denote  the  age  of  any  one 
by  saying  that  he  is  the  son  of  so  many 
years.  *^  About.  Marg.,  'or,  now.'  The 
word  both  in  the  text  and  the  margin  is 
designed  to  express  the  supposed  sense 
of  his  'being  the  son  of  sixty  years.' 
The  language  of  the  original  would,  how- 
ever, be  accurately  expressed  by  saying 
that  he  was  then  sixty  years  old.  Though 
Cyrus  was  the  active  agent  in  taking  Baby- 
lon, yet  it  was  done  in  the  name  and  by 
the  authority  of  Cyaxares  or  Darius,  and 
as  he  was  the  actual  sovereign,  the  name 
of  his  general — Cjtus — is  not  mentioned 
here,  though  he  was  in  fact  the  most 
important  agent  in  taking  the  city,  and 
became  ultimately  much  more  celebrated 
than  Darius  was. 

This  portion  of  history — the  closing 
scene  in  the  reign  of  a  mighty  monarch, 
and  the  closing  scene  in  the  independent 
existence  of  one  of  the  most  powerful 
kingdoms  that  has  ever  existed  on  the 
earth,  is  full  of  instructive  lessons,  and, 
in  view  of  the  chapter  as  thus  explainedj 
we  may  make  the  following 


256  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  538. 

REMARKS. 

(1.)  AVE  have  liere  an  impresslre  illustration  of  the  sin  of  sacrilege,  tp.  2,  3.  In  all  ages,  and 
ftuiong  nil  people,  this  has  heen  regarded  as  a  sin  of  peculiar  enormity,  and  it  is  quite  evident 
Jiat  God  in  this  solemn  scene  meant  to  confirm  the  general  judgment  of  mankind  on  the  sub- 
ject. Among  all  people,  where  any  kind  of  religion  has  prevailed,  there  arc  places  and  objects 
■which  are  regarded  as  set  apart  to  sacred  use,  and  which  are  not  to  be  employed  for  common 
and  profane  purposes.  Though  in  theniselves — in  the  gold  and  silver,  the  wood  and  stone  of 
which  they  are  made — there  is  no  essenti.il  holiness,  yet  they  derive  a  sncredness  from  being 
get  apart  to  divine  purposes,  and  it  has  always  been  held  to  be  a  high  crime  to  treat  them  with 
indignity  or  contempt;  to  rob  altars,  or  to  desecrate  holy  places.  This  general  impression  of 
mankind  it  was  clearly  the  design  of  God  to  confirm  in  the  case  before  us,  when  the  sacred 
vessels  of  the  temple — vessels  consecrated  in  tlie  most  .solemn  manner  to  the  worship  of  Jeho- 
vah— were  profanely  employed  for  the  purposes  of  carousal.  God  had  borne  it  patiently  when 
those  vessels  had  been  removed  from  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  and  when  they  had  been  laid 
up  among  the  spoils  of  victory  in  the  temples  at  Babylon,  but  when  they  were  profaned  for 
purposes  of  revelry — when  they  were  brought  forth  to  grace  a  hcatlien  festival,  and  to  be  em- 
ployed in  the  midst  of  scenes  of  riot  and  dissipation,  it  was  time  for  him  to  interpose,  and  to 
show  to  these  profane  revellers  that  there  is  a  God  in  heaven, 

(2.)  We  m.ay  see  the  peril  of  such  festivals  as  that  celebrated  by  Belshazzar  and  his  lords, 
ver.  1,  seq.  It  is  by  no  means  probable  that,  when  the  feast  was  contemplated  and  arranged, 
anything  was  designed  like  that  which  occxirred  in  the  progress  of  the  affair.  It  was  not  a 
matter  of  set  purpose  to  introduce  the  females  of  the  harem  to  this  scene  of  carousal,  and  still 
less  to  make  use  of  the  sacred  vessels  dedicated  to  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  to  grace  the  mid- 
night revelry.  It  is  not  improbable  that  they  would  have  been  at  first  shocked  at  such  an 
outrage  on  what  was  regarded  as  propriety,  or  what  would  have  been  deemed  sacred  by  all 
people.  It  was  only  when  the  king  had  '  ta.sted  the  wine '  that  these  things  were  proposed  ;  and 
none  who  attend  on  such  a  banquet  as  this;  none  who  come  together  for  purposes  of  drinking 
and  feasting,  can  foretel  what  they  may  be  led  to  do  under  the  influence  of  wine  and  strong 
drink.  No  man  is  certain  of  vnt  doing  foolish  and  wicked  things  who  gives  himself  up  to  such 
indulgences;  no  man  knows  what  he  may  do  that  may  be  the  cause  of  bitter  regret  and  painful 
mortification  in  the  recollection. 

(3.)  God  has  the  means  of  access  to  the  consciences  of  men,  ver.  5.  In  this  case,  it  was  by  writ- 
ing on  the  wall  with  his  own  fingers  certain  mysterious  words  which  none  could  interpret, 
but  which  no  one  doubted  were  of  fearful  import.  No  one  present,  it  would  appear,  had  any 
doubt  that  somehow  what  was  written  was  connected  with  some  awful  judgment,  and  the 
fearfulncss  of  what  they  dreaded  arose  manifestly  from  the  consciousness  of  their  own  guilt. 
It  is  not  often  that  God  comes  forth  in  this  way  to  alarm  the  guilty  ;  but  he  has  a  thousand 
methods  of  doing  it,  and  no  one  can  be  sure  that  in  an  instant  he  will  not  summon  all  the  sins  of 
his  past  life  to  remembrance.  He  co!(?fZ  write  our  guilt  in  letters  of  light  before  us — in  the 
chamber  where  we  sleep;  in  the  hall  where  we  engage  in  revelry;  on  the  face  of  the  sky  at 
night;  or  he  can  make  it  as  plain  to  our  own  minds  as?/ it  were  thus  written  out.  To  Belshaz- 
zar in  his  palace,  surrounded  by  his  lords,  he  .showed  this ;  to  us  in  society  or  ."^olitude  he  can  do 
the  same  thing.  No  sinner  can  have  any  security  that  he  may  not  in  a  moment  be  overwhelmed 
with  the  conviction  of  his  own  depravity,  and  with  dreadful  apprehension  of  the  wrath  to 
come. 

(4.)  We  have  in  this  chapter  (ver.  C)  a  striking  illustration  of  the  effects  of  a  sudden  alarm 
to  the  guilty.  The  countenance  of  the  monarch  was  changed ;  his  thoughts  troubled  him ; 
the  joints  of  his  loins  were  loosed,  and  his  knees  smote  together.  Such  effects  are  not  un- 
common when  a  .sinner  is  made  to  feel  that  he  is  in  the  presence  of  God,  and  when  his  thoughts 
are  led  along  to  the  future  world.  The  human  frame  is  so  made  that  these  changes  occur 
as  indicative  of  the  troubles  which  the  mind  experiences,  and  the  fact  that  it  is  thus  agi- 
tated shows  the  power  which  God  has  over  us.  No  guilty  man  can  be  secure  that  he  will 
not  thus  be  alarmed  when  he  comes  to  contemplate  the  possibility  that  he  may  soon  he 
called  before  his  Maker,  and  the  fact  that  he  may  thus  be  alarmed  should  be  one  of  the  con.sid- 
erations  bearing  on  his  mind  to  lead  him  to  a  course  of  virtxie  and  religion.  Such  terror  is 
proof  of  conscious  guilt,  for  the  innocent  have  nothing  to  dread,  and  if  a  man  is  sure  that  he  is 
prepared  to  appear  before  God,  he  is  not  alarmed  at  the  prospect.  They  who  live  in  sin  ;  they 
who  indulge  in  revelry  :  they  who  are  profane  and  sacrilegious  ;  they  who  abuse  the  mercies 
of  God  and  live  to  deride  sacred  things,  can  never  be  certain  that  in  a  moment,  by  the  revela- 
tion of  their  guilt  to  their  own  souls,  and  by  a  sudden  message  from  the  eternal  world,  they 
may  not  be  overwhelmed  with  the  deepest  consternation.  Their  countenances  may  become 
deadly  pale,  their  joints  may  be  loosed,  and  their  limbs  tremble.  It  is  only  the  rigliteous  who 
can  look  calmly  at  the  judgment. 

(5.)  We  may  see  from  this  chapter  one  of  the  effects  of  the  terror  of  a  guilty  conscience.  It  is  not 
Raid,  indeed,  that  the  mysterious  fingers  on  the  wall  recorded  the  gvilt  of  the  monarch.  But  they 
recorded  somcDtinr/ ;  they  were  making  some  record  that  manifestly  pertained  to  him.  How  na- 
tural was  it  to  suppose  that  it  was  a  record  of  his  guilt !  And  who  is  there  that  could  bear  a  record 
made  in  that  manner  of  his  own  thoughts  and  purposes;  of  his  desires  ajd  feelings;  of  what 
he  is  conscious  is  passing  within  the  chambers  of  his  own  soul  ?  There  is  no  one  who  would 
not  turn  pale  if  he  .saw  a  mysterious  hand  writing  all  his  thoughts  and  purposes — all  the  deeds 
of  his  past  life — on  the  wall  of  his  chsimber  at  night,  and  bringing  at  once  all  his  concealed 
thoughtc.,  and  all  his  forgotten  deeds  before  his  mind.  And  if  this  is  so,  how  will  the  sinnel 
icar  the  disclosures  that  will  be  made  at  the  day  of  judgment  ? 


B.C.E38.1  CHAPTER  VI.  251 


CHAPTER  VI. 

^  1.  AUTHENTICIly  OF  THE  CHAPTER. 

This  chapter,  like  the  previous  ones,  has  not  escaped  serious  objections  as  to  its  authen- 
ticity and  crebibility.  Xlie  objections  whicli  have  been  made  to  it  have  been  derived  from  what 
is  regarded  as  incredible  in  its  statements.  It  is  important,  as  in  the  previous  chapters, 
to  inquire  whether  tlie  objections  are  insuperable,  or  wliether  this  is  so  free  from  reasonable 
objection  as  to  be  worthy  to  be  received  as  a  portion  of  divine  truth.  The  objections,  as  urged 
by  Bertholdt  (Daniel  aus  dem  Hebraish-Aramaischen  neu  iibersetzt,  &.C.,  pp.  72 — 76,  and  pp. 
357 — 3b4,)and  by  Dleek,  are  capable  of  being  reduced  to  the  lour  following : 

I.  That  it  is  wholly  improbable  that  a  monarch,  in  the  circumstances  of  Darius,  would  giva 
an  order  so  unreasonable  and  foolish  as  tliat  no  one  of  his  subjects  should  present  any  petition 
for  a  month  to  any  one,  God  or  man,  but  to  himself  It  is  alleged  that  no  good  end  could  have 
been  proposed  by  it;  that  it  would  have  perilled  the  peace  of  tlie  empire ;  that  among  a  people 
who  worshipped  many  gods — who  hud  gods  in  all  their  dwellings — it  would  have  been  vaia 
to  hope  that  the  command  could  have  been  carried  peaceably  into  execution;  and  that, 
whoever  proposed  this,  it  could  not  have  been  executed  without  shaking  the  stability  of  the 
throne.  Bertholdt  asks  (p.  357,  seq.),  'Can  one  believe  that,  among  a  people  so  devoted  to  reli- 
gion as  the  Babylonians  were,  it  should  have  been  forbidden  them  to  address  their  gods  for  one 
single  day?  Is  it  credible  that  the  counsellors  of  the  king  were  so  irreligious  that  without  fear 
of  tlie  avenging  deities  they  would  endeavour  to  enforce  such  an  order  as  that  here  referred  to — 
that  no  petition  should  be  addressed  to  God  or  man  for  a  month,  except  to  the  king?  And  was 
Cyaxares  so  destitute  of  religion  as  not  to  refuse  to  sanction  sv\ch  a  mandate?  And  does  this 
agree  with  the  fact  that  in  the  issue  itself  he  showed  so  much  respect  to  a  foreign  God — the 
God  of  the  Jews  ?  Under  what  pretence  could  the  ministers  of  the  king  give  him  this  counsel  ? 
Could  it  be  under  any  purpose  of  deifying  his  own  person?  But  it  remains  to  be  proved  that 
either  then,  or  soon  after  that  time,  it  was  customary  in  Asia  to  attribute  divine  honours  to  a 
monarch,  whether  deceased  or  living.' 

To  this  objection,  Ilengstenberg  (Die  Authentie  des  Daniel,  p.  125,  seq.)  replies,  by  an  en- 
deavour to  show  that  it  was  a  common  opinion  in  Persia  that  the  king  was  regarded  '  as  a  rep- 
resentative, and  an  incarnation  of  Ormuzd ;'  and  that  nothing  is  more  probable  than  that  such  a 
monarch  coming  to  the  throne  of  Babylon,  would  be  willing  to  appear  in  that  character,  claim- 
ing divine  honours,  and  early  testing  the  intelligence  of  his  new  subjects  to  receive  him  in 
that  character  in  which  he  was  recognized  in  his  own  land.  In  confirmation  of  this,  he  quotes 
two  passages  from  Ileeren  (Ideen  3te  Ausg.  I.  i.  p.  44C,  51),  in  proof  that  these  ideas  thus  pre- 
vailed. '  The  person  of  the  king,'  Ileeren  says,  '  is  in  Asiatic  kingdoms  the  middle  point  around 
which  all  revolves.  lie  is  regarded,  according  to  the  Oriental  notions,  not  so  much  the  ruler 
as  the  actual  owner  of  the  people  .and  land.  All  their  arrangements  are  formed  on  this  funda- 
mental idea,  and  they  are  carried  to  an  extent  which  to  Europeans  appears  incredible  and  ridi- 
culous.' '  The  idea  of  citizenship,  according  to  the  European  nations,  is  altogether  a  strange 
idea  to  them;  all,  without  exception,  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest,  are  the  servants  of  the 
king,  and  the  right  to  rule  over  them,  and  to  deal  with  them  as  he  pleases,  is  a  right  which  is 
never  called  in  question.'  Ilengstenberg  then  remarks,  that  it  is  capable  of  the  clearest  proof 
that  the  linf/s  nf  tlie  ikdes  and  Persians  were  regarded  and  honoured  as  the  representatifes  and 
incarnations  of  Ormuzd.  In  proof  of  this,  he  quotes  the  following  passage  from  Ileeren  (p.  474), 
showing  that  this  idea  early  prevailed  among  the  followers  of  Zoroaster.  '  Zoroaster,'  says  he, 
'  saw  the  kingdom  of  light  and  of  darkness  both  developed  upon  the  earth ;  Iran,  the  Medish- 
Bactrish  kingdom,  under  the  sceptre  of  Gustasp,  is  to  him  the  image  of  the  kingdom  of  Ormuzd; 
the  king  himself  is  an  image  of  him;  Turan,  the  Northern  Nomadland,  when  Afrasiab  reigned; 
is  the  image  of  the  kingdom  of  darkne.^s,  under  the  dominion  of  Ahrinian.'  This  idea,  says 
Hengstenberg,  the  magi  made  use  of  when  they  wished  to  bring  the  king  to  their  own  interests, 
or  to  promote  any  favourite  object  of  their  own.  The  king  was  regarded  as  the  representative, 
the  visible  manifestation  of  Ormuzd,  ruling  with  power  as  uncircumscribed  as  his ;  the  seven 
princes  standing  near  him  were  representatives  of  the  seven  Amhaspands,  who  stood  before 
the  throne  of  Ormuzd.  The  evidence  that  the  Persian  kings  were  regarded  as  an  embodiment 
of  the  deity,  or  that  they  represented  him  on  earth,  Ilengstenberg  remarks  (p.  126),  is  clear  in 
the  classic  writings,  in  the  Scriptures,  and  in  the  Persian  monuments.  In  proof  of  this, 
he  appeals  to  the  following  authorities  among  the  classic  writers,  Plutarch  (Themistocl. 
cap.  27)  ;  Xenophon  (Agesil.)  ;  Isocrates  (Panegyri  de  Pers.  princ.  p.  17);  Arrian,  6.  29;  Cur- 
tius  8.  5.  Curtius  says,  Persas  reges  snos  inter  deos  colere.  I'or  thi'  same  purpose.  Hengsten- 
ber"'  (pp.  12S,  129.)  appeals  to  the  following  pa.ssage  of  Scripture,  Esther  iii.  4,  and  the  conduct 
of  .Mordecai  in  general,  who  refused,  as  he  supposes,  the  respect  which  Ilaman  demanded  as  the 
«rst  minister  of  the  king,  on  religious  grounds,  and  because  more  was  required  and  expected 
of  him  than  mere  civil  respect- — or  that  a  degree  of  homage  was  required  entirely  inconsistent 
with  that  due  to  the  true  God.  In  proof  of  the  same  thing,  Ilepstonberg  appeals  to  Persian  monu- 
ments, pp.  129 — 132.  The  proof  is  too  long  to  be  inserted  her*.  These  monuments  ebow  that 
22* 


258  DANIEL.  jB.  C.  538. 

the  Pereian  kinjrs  were  regarded  and  adored  as  impersonations  of  Ormuzd.  To  this  may  be 
added  many  of  their  inscriptions.  In  the  work  by  de  Sacy,  Jlemoires  s.  divers.  Autiij.  de  la 
Perse,  I'l.  i.  p.  27,  31,  the  Persian  kings  are  mentioned  as  tVyotoi  iuov,  ck  ytnovs  S£u;',and 
Sto? — both  as  offsprings  of  the  gods,  as  of  the  race  of  the  gods,  and  as  gods. 

If  this  is  correct,  and  the  Persian  kings  were  regarded  as  divine ;  as  an  impersonation  or  in« 
carnation  of  the  God  tliat  was  wor.sliipped,  then  ttiere  is  no  improbability  in  the  supposition 
that  it  might  be  proposed  to  the  king  that  for  a  given  space  of  time  he  should  allow  no  petition 
to  be  presented  to  any  one  else,  God  or  man.  It  would  be  easy  to  persuade  a  monarch  having 
such  pretensions  to  issue  such  a  decree,  and  especially  when  he  hud  subjected  a  foreign  people 
like  the  Uabylonians,  to  be  willing  thus  to  assert  his  authority  over  them,  and  show  them  what 
respect  and  homage  he  demanded.  In  judging,  also,  of  the  probability  of  what  is  here  said,  we 
are  to  remember  the  arbitrary  character  of  Oriental  monarchs,  and  of  the  Persian  kings  no  less 
than  others.  Assuredly  there  were  as  strange  things  in  the  character  and  conduct  of  Xerxes, 
one  of  the  successors  of  this  same  Darius,  as  any  that  are  recorded  in  this  chapter  of  the  book 
of  Daniel;  and  if  these  acts  of  folly,  which  he  perpetrated,  had  been  written  in  a  book  claim- 
ing to  be  divinely  inspired,  they  would  have  been  liable  to  much  greater  objection  than  any- 
thing which  is  stated  here.  The  mere  fact  that  a  thing  is  in  itself  foolish  and  unreasonable, 
and  apparently  absurd,  is  no  conclusive  evidence  that  a  man  clothed  with  absolute  authority 
would  not  be  guilty  of  it. 

To  all  that  has  been  said  on  this  point,  there  should  be  added  a  remark  made  by  Eertholdt 
himself  (p.  357)  respecting  Darius,  which  will  show  that  what  is  here  said  of  him  is  really  not 
at  all  inconsistent  with  his  character,  and  not  improbable.  He  says,  speaking  of  Darius  or 
Cyaxares,  that  '  from  his  character,  as  given  by  Xenophon,  a  man  of  weak  mind,  (Cyrop.  i.  4, 
22,  iv.  1,  13,)  a  man  passionate  and  peevish,  (iii.  3,  29,  iv.  5,  8,  v.  5,  i.  8,)  a  man  given  to  wine  and 
women,  (iv.  5,  52,  v.  5,  44,)  we  are  not  to  expect  much  wisdom.'  There  is  nothing  stated  here 
by  Daniel  which  is  inconsistent  with  the  character  of  such  a  man. 

II.  A  second  objection  made  to  the  probability  of  this  statement,  is  drawn  from  the  character 
of  the  edict  which  Darius  is  said  to  have  proclaimed,  commanding  that  honour  should  be  ren- 
dered to  Jehovah,  vs.  25 — 27.  It  is  alleged  that  if  such  an  edict  had  been  published,  it  is  in 
credible  that  no  mention  is  made  of  it  in  history;  that  the  thing  was  so  remarkable  that  it  must 
have  Ijcen  noticed  bj-  the  writers  who  have  referred  to  Darius  or  Cyaxares. 

To  this  it  may  be  replied,  (1.)  that,  for  anything  that  appears  to  the  contrary,  Daniel  may 
be  as  credible  a  histori.an  as  Xenophon  or  Herodotus.  No  one  can  demonstrate  that  the  account 
here  is  not  as  worthy  of  belief  as  if  it  had  appeared  in  a  Greek  or  Latin  classic  author.  When 
will  the  world  get  over  the  folly  of  supposing  that  what  is  found  in  a  book  claiming  to  be  in- 
spired should  be  regarded  as  suspicious  until  it  is  confirmed  by  the  authority  of  some  heathen 
writer ;  that  what  is  found  in  any  other  book  should  be  regarded  as  necessarily  true,  however 
much  it  ma3'  conflict  with  the  testimony  of  the  sacred  writers?  Viewed  in  any  light,  Daniel  is 
as  worthy  of  confidence  as  any  Greek  or  Latin  historian  ;  what  he  says  is  as  credible  as  if  it  had 
been  found  in  the  works  of  Sanchoniathon  or  ISerosus.  (2)  There  are,  in  fact,  few  things  pre- 
served in  any  history  in  regard  to  Darius  the  Mede.  Comp.  g2.  The  information  given  of  him 
by  Xenophon  consists  merely  of  a  few  detached  and  fragmentary  notices,  and  it  is  not  at  all 
remarkable  that  the  facts  here  mentioned,  and  the  proclamation  which  he  made,  should  be  un- 
noticed by  him.  A  proclamation  respecting  a  foreign  god,  when  it  was  customary  to  recognize 
60  many  gods,  and  indeed  to  regard  all  such  gods  as  entitled  to  respect  and  honour,  would  not  be 
likely  to  arrest  the  attention  of  a  Greek  historian  even  if  he  knew  of  it,  and,  for  the  same  reason, 
it  would  be  scarcely  probable  that  he  would  know  of  it  at  all.  Nothing  would  be  more  likely 
to  pass  away  from  the  recollection  of  a  people  than  such  an  edict,  or  less  likely  to  be  known  to 
a  foreigner.  So  far  as  the  evidence  goes,  it  would  seem  that  the  proclamation  made  no  dis- 
turbance in  the  realm;  the  injunction  was  generally  acquiesced  in  by  all  except  Daniel;  and 
it  was  soon  forgotten.  If  it  was  understood,  as  it  was  not  improbable,  that  this  was  designed 
as  a  sort  of  (est  to  see  whether  the  people  would  receive  the  commands  of  Darius  as  binding 
on  them  ;  that  they  would  honour  him,  as  the  Persian  monarch  was  honoured  in  his  own  pro- 
per kingdom,  it  would  seem  to  have  been  entirely  successful,  and  there  was  no  occasion  to 
refer  to  it  again. 

III.  A  third  objection  urged  by  Bertholdt  (p.  361),  is  derived  from  the  account  respecting  the 
lions  in  this  chapter.  It  is  alleged  by  him  that  the  account  is  so  full  of  improbabilities,  that  it 
cannot  be  received  as  true ;  that  though  the  fact  that  they  did  not  fall  on  Daniel  can  be  ex- 
plained from  the  circumstance  that  they  were  not  hungry,  Ac;  yet  that  it  is  incredible  that 
they  should  have  fallen  on  the  enemies  of  Daniel  as  soon  as  thej'  were  thrown  into  the  den; 
that  the  king  should  expect  to  find  Daniel  alive  after  being  thrown  among  them ;  that  he  should 
have  called  in  this  manner  to  Daniel,  &c. 

To  all  this  it  is  sufficii^nt  to  reply,  that  no  one  can  suppose  that  the  facts  stated  here  can  be 
explained  by  any  natural  causes.  The  whole  representation  is  evidently  designed  to  leave  the 
inpression  that  there  was  a  special  divine  interposition — a  miracle — in  the  case,  and  the  only 
explanation  which  is  admissible  here  is  that  wliich  would  be  proper  in  the  case  of  any  other 
miracle.  The  only  questions  which  could  be  asked,  or  which  would  be  proper,  are  these 
two;  whether  a  miracle  is  possible;  and  whether  this  was  a  suitable  occasion  for  the  miracu- 
lous exertion  of  divine  power.  As  to  the  first  of  these  questions,  it  is  not  necessary  to  argue 
siiat  here — for  the  objection  might  lie  with  equal  force  against  any  other  miracle  referred  to  in 
Vte  Bible.    As  to  the  second,  it  may  be  observed,  that  it  is  not  easy  to  conceive  of  a  case  when 


B.  C.  538.J  CHAPTER    VI.  259 

a  miracle  would  bi)  moj-e  proper.  If  a  miracle  was  ever  proper  to  protect  the  inno>.>ont ;  or  to 
Timliciito  the  claims  of  the  true  God  agninst  all  fal.se  gods ;  or  to  make  a  deep  and  lasting  imprcs- 
yion  on  the  minds  of  men  that  Jehovah  is  the  true  God,  it  is  not  easy  to  conceive  of  a  more 
appropriate  occasiou  than  this.  No  situation  could  be  conceived  to  be  more  apjiropriate  than 
when  an  impression  was  desiij:ned  to  be  made  ou  the  mind  of  the  sovereisn  of  tlie  most  mighty 
empire  ou  the  earth;  or  than  when,  through  a  proclamation  issued  from  the  throne,  the  na- 
ti  JUS  subject  to  bis  sceptre  should  be  summoned  to  acknowledge  him  as  the  true  God. 

IV.  A  fourth  objection  urged  by  Bleek,  Theologische  /eitschrift,  pp.  202 — 264,  is,  substan- 
tially, the  following:  that  it  is  remarkable  that  there  is  in  this  account  no  allusion  to  the  three 
comjianions  of  Daniel ;  to  those  who  had  been  trained  with  him  at  the  Chaldean  court,  and  had 
been  admitted  also  to  honour,  and  who  had  so  abundantly  shown  that  they  were  worshippers 
of  the  true  God.  The  whole  story,  says  Bleek,  appears  to  have  been  designed  to  produce  a  moral 
etTect  on  the  mind  of  the  Jews,  by  the  unknown  author,  to  persuade  them  in  some  period  of 
persecution  to  adhere  to  the  God  of  their  fathers  in  the  midst  of  all  persecution  and  opposition. 

To  this  objection  it  may  be  replied,  (1)  That  it  is  wholly  probable  that  there  were  many 
other  pious  Jews  in  Babylon  at  this  time  beside  Daniel — Jews  who  would,  like  him,  adhere  to 
the  worship  of  the  true  God,  regardless  of  the  command  of  the  king.  We  are  not  to  suppose, 
by  any  mean.s,  that  Daniel  was  the  oh/^  conscientious  Jew  in  Babylon.  The  narrative  evidently 
does  not  require  that  we  should  come  to  such  a  conclusion,  but  that  there  was  something  pecw- 
liar  in  regard  to  Daniel.  (2)  As  to  the  three  companions  and  friends  of  Daniel,  it  is  possible, 
as  Ilengstenberg  remarks  (Authentic,  &c.  p.  135),  that  they  may  either  have  been  dead,  or  may 
have  been  removed  from  office,  and  were  leading  private  lives.  (3)  This  edict  was  evidently 
aimed  at  Daniel.  The  whole  narrative  supposes  this.  For  some  cause,  according  to  the  narra< 
tive — and  there  is  no  improbability  that  such  an  opposition  might  exist  against  a  foreigner 
advanced  to  honour  at  court — there  was  some  ground  of  jealousy  against  him,  and  a  purpo.se 
formed  to  remove  or  disgrace  him.  There  does  not  appear  to  have  been  any  jealousy  of  others, 
or  any  purpose  to  disturb  others  in  the  free  enjoyraeui  of  their  religion.  The  aim  was  to  hum- 
ble Daniel ;  to  secure  his  removal  from  office,  and  to  degrade  him ;  and  for  this  purpose  a  plan  was 
laid  with  consummate  .skill.  He  was  known  to  be  upright;  and  they  who  laid  the  plot  felt 
assured  that  no  charge  of  guilt,  no  accusation  of  crime,  or  unfaithfulness  in  his  office,  could  be 
alleged  against  him.  He  was  known  to  be  a  man  who  would  not  shrink  from  the  avowal  of  his 
opiuion,s,  or  from  the  performance  of  those  duties  which  he  owed  to  his  God.  He  was  known  to 
be  a  mau  .so  much  devoted  to  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of  his  people,  that  no  law  what- 
ever would  prevent  him  from  rendering  to  him  the  homage  which  was  his  due,  and  it  was  be- 
lieved, therefore,  tiat  if  a  law  were  made,  on  any  pretence,  that  no  one  in  the  realm  should  ask 
anything  of  either  God  or  man,  except  the  king,  for  a  definite  space  of  time,  there  would  be  a 
moral  ciTtainty  that  Daniel  would  be  found  to  be  a  violator  of  that  law,  and  his  degradation 
and  death  would  be  certain.  What  was  here  proposed  was  a  scheme  worthy  of  crafty  and 
jealous  and  wicked  men;  and  the  only  difficulty,  evidently,  which  would  occur  to  their  mind 
would  be  to  persuade  the  king  to  enter  into  the  measure  so  far  as  to  promulgate  such  a  law. 
As  already  obserTed,  plausible  pretences  might  be  found  for  that,  and  when  that  was  done, 
they  would  naturally  conclude  that  their  whole  .scheme  was  successful.  (4)  There  is  no  imprc^ 
bability,  therefore,  in  supposing  that,  as  the  whole  thing  was  aimed  at  Daniel,  there  might  have 
been  many  pious  Jews  who  still  worshipped  God  in  secret  in  Babylon,  and  that  no  one  would 
give  information  against  them.  As  the  edict  was  not  aimed  at  them,  it  is  not  surprising  that 
we  hear  of  no  prosecution  against  them,  and  no  complaint  made  of  them  for  di-sregarding  the 
law.  If  Daniel  was  found  to  violate  the  statute ;  if  he  was  ensnared  and  entrapped  by  the  cun- 
ning device;  if  he  was  humbled  and  punished,  all  the  purposes  contemplated  by  its  authors 
would  be  accomplished,  and  we  need  not  suppose  that  they  would  give  themselves  any  trouble 
about  others. 

g2.   THE   QUESTION  liTnO  W.^S  D.\RinS   THE   MEDE. 

Considerable  importance  is  to  be  attached  to  the  question  who  was  '  Darius  the  Medo,'  as  it 
has  been  made  a  ground  of  objection  to  the  Scripture  narrative,  that  no  person  by  that  name 
is  mentioned  in  the  Greek  writers. 

There  are  three  Medo-Persian  kings  of  the  name  of  Darius  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament. 
One  occurs  in  the  Book  of  Kzra  (iv.  5,  xxv.  1,  vi.  1,  12,  15),  in  Ilaggai  (i.  1,  ii.  10),  and  in 
Zech.  (i.  17),  as  the  king  who,  in  the  second  year  of  his  reign,  effected  the  execution  of  those 
decrees  of  Cyrus  which  granted  the  Jews  the  liberty  of  rebuilding  the  temple,  the  fulfilment 
of  which  had  been  obstructed  by  the  malicious  representations  which  their  enemies  had  made 
to  his  immediate  successors.  It  is  commonly  agreed  that  this  king  was  Darius  Uystaspis,  who 
succeeded  the  usurper  Smerdis,  B.  C.  521,  and  reigned  thirty-six  years. 

A  .second  is  mentioned  as  'Darius  the  Persian,'  in  Neh.  xii.  22.  All  that  is  said  of  him  is, 
that  the  succession  of  priest'  was  registered  up  to  his  reign.  This  was  either  Darius  Kothus, 
iS.  C.  42.3,  or  Darius  Codomaifas,  B.  C.  336.     See  Kitto's  Cyclo.  Art.  Darius. 

The  remaining  one  is  that  mentioned  in  Daniel  only  as  Darius  the  Median.  In  ch.  jx.l, 
hi'  is  mentiouedlvs  Darius  the  son  of  Ahasuerus,  of  the  seed  of  the  Medes.  Much  difference 
of  opinion  has  prevailed  as  to  the  person  here  intended;  but  a  strict  attention  to  what  is 
actually  expressed  in.  or  fairly  deduced  from,  the  terms  used  in  Daniel,  tends  to  narrow  the  field 
cf  conjecture  very  considerably,  if  it  does  not  decide  the  question.    It  appears  from  the  paaeag* 


260  DANIEL.  [B,  C.  538 

in  ch.  V  30, 31,  and  vi.  28,  that  Darius  the  Mode  ohtained  the  dominion  over  Kabylon  on  the  death 
of  I3els.liazzar,  who  was  the  hist  Chaldean  king,  and  that  ho  was  the  immediate  predecessor 
of  Koresh  (Cyrus)  in  the  sorereignty.  The  historical  juncture  here  defined  belongs,  therefore, 
to  the  period  when  the  Medo-Pcrsiau  army  led  hy  Cyrus  took  Babylon  (IJ.  C.  63S),  and  Daiiua 
the  Mede  must  denote  the  first  king  of  a  foreign  dynasty  who  assumed  tlie  dominion  over  the 
I'ahylonian  empire  before  Cyrus.  These  indications  all  concur  in  the  person  of  Cyaxares  the 
Second,  the  son  and  successor  of  Astyages  [Ahasuerus],  and  the  immediate  predecessor  of  Cyrus. 
Kitto's  Cyclo.  Art.  Darius. 

In  refei'ence  to  the  question,  who  was  Darius  the  Mode,  Bcrtholdt  has  examined  the  differ'fnt 
opinions  which  have  been  outi'rtained  in  a  manner  that  is  satisfactory,  and  I  cannot  do  better 
than  to  present  his  views  on  the  subject.  They  are  found  in  his  Viertcr  Kxcurs  iiier  den  Darius 
Medus,  in  his  Commentary  on  Daniel,  pp.  843 — 868.  I  will  give  the  substance  of  the  lircursus, 
in  a  free  translation. 

'  Who  was  Darius  the  Mede,  the  son  of  Ahasuerus,  of  whom  mention  is  made  in  the  sixth 
chapter  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  again  in  ch.  ix.  1  and  xi.  1  ?  It  is  agreed  on  all  liands  that  \w 
was  the  immediate  successor  of  Belshazzar,  the  king  of  the  Chaldeans  (eh.  v.  30).  Comp.  ch.  vi.  1 . 
15ut,  notwithstanding  this,  there  is  uncertainty  as  to  his  person,  since  history  makes  no  men- 
tion of  a  iledian  Darius.  It  is,  therefore,  not  to  he  wondered  at  that  various  opinions  have 
been  entertained  bj"  commentators  on  the  Scriptures,  and  by  historical  inquirers.  Conring 
(Advers.  Chronol.  c.  13),  whom  many  have  followed,  particularly  Ilarenberg  (Aufklarung  dea 
Buches  Daniel,  s.  454,  se.q.),  has  endeavoured  to  show  that  Darius  the  Mede  was  the  fourth 
Chaldean  monarch,  Neriglissar,  and  that  Belshazzar,  his  predecessor,  was  Kvil-Merodach. 
J.  tfcaliger  (De  emendat.  temporum,  p.  570,  !:eq.)  recognized  in  Darius  the  Mede  the  last  Chaldean 
king  in  Babylon,  Nahonned,  and  in  Belshazzar,  the  one  before  the  last,  Laborosoarchod,  which 
hypothesis  also  Calvisius,  Petavius,  and  Buddeus  adopted.  On  the  other  hand,  Sjncellus 
(Chronogr.  p.  232),  Cidrenus  (Chron.  p.  142),  the  Alexandrine  Chronicle,  Marsham  (Can.  Chron. 
p.  G04,  seq.),  the  two  most  recent  editors  of  iEschylu.s,  Schutz  (in  zweiteu  Kxcurs  zu  jKschy- 
lus's  Trepoai,)  and  Bothe  (iEsch.  dramata,  p.  C71),  held  that  Darius  the  Mede  was  the  Median 
king  A.styages,  the  maternal  grandfather  of  Cyrus.  Des  A'jgnolles  (Chronologic,  T.  2,  p.  495), 
and  Schriier  (Regnum  Baby),  t-ect.  0,  gl2,  scq.),  held  him  to  be  a  prince  of  Media,  a  younger 
brother  of  Astyages,  whom  Cyrus  made  king  over  Babylon.  Another  opinion,  however,  deserves 
more  respect  than  this,  which  was  advanced  by  Marianus  Scotus,  a  Benedictine  monk  of  the 
eleventh  century,  though  this  hypothesis  is  not  tenable,  which  opinion  has  found,  in  modern 
time?,  a  warm  advocate  in  Beer  (Kings  of  Israel  and  Judah,  p.  22,  seq.).  According  to  this  opi- 
nion, it  was  held  that  Darius  the  Mede  is  the  same  person  as  the  third  Persian  king  after  Cyrus, 
Darius  Ilystaspis,  and  that  Belshazzarwas  indeed  the  last  Chaldean  king,  Kabonned,  but  that  in 
the  first  capture  of  Babylon  under  Cyrus,  according  to  the  account  of  Berosus  (in  Jos.  c.  Ap.  i.20), 
and  Megasthenes  (in  Euseh.  Prasp.  Evang.  ix.  44.)  he  was  not  put  to  death,  but  was  appointed 
by  Cyrus  as  a  vassal-king;  and  then  in  the  second  taking  of  Babylon  under  Darius  Ilystaspis, 
(Ilerod.  iii.  150,  seq.),  from  whom  he  had  sought  to  make  himself  independent,  he  was  slain. 
This  opinion  has  this  advantage,  that  it  has  in  its  favour  the  fact  that  it  has  the  undoubted 
name  of  Darius,  but  it  is  not  conformable  to  history  to  suppose  that  Darius  Hystaspis  was  a 
son  of  Ahasuerus,  the  Mede ;  for  his  father,  Ilystaspis,  was  a  native  born  prince  of  Persia, 
(Xeno.  Cyrop.  iv.  2,  40,)  of  the  family  of  the  Acha?menides,  Herod,  i.  209,  210.  Darius  Hystaspja 
was  indeed  remotely  related  by  means  of  the  mother  of  Cyrus,  .Maudane,  with  the  royal  family  ; 
biit  this  relation  could  not  entitle  him  to  be  called  a  Mede,  for  since  she  was  the  mother  "of 
Cyrus,  it  is  altogether  inexplicable  that  since  both  were  thus  connected  with  each  other  that 
Cyrus  should  be  called  tlie  Persian  (N^D'lD),  and  Darius  the  Mede  (N'^'i!?),  Dan  vi.  29.  The  sup- 
position, moreover,  that  Nahonned,  after  the  taking  of  Babylon,  was  appointed  as  a  tributary 
king  by  Cyrus,  is  wholly  gratuitous;  since  Nahonned,  according  to  the  express  testimony  of 
Xenophon  (Cyrop.  vii.  5,  20,  seq.),  was  slain  at  the  taking  of  Babylon. 

'There  is  yet  one  other  opinion  respecting  Darius  the  Mede,  to  which  I  will  first  prefix  the 
following  remarks:  (1)  Darius  the  Mede  is  mentioned  in  ch.  vi.  29,  as  the  immediate  pre- 
decessor of  Cyrus  in  Babylon;  (2)  BeLshazzar  as  the  la.st  Babylonish  Chaldee  king;  (3)  the 
account  of  the  violent  death  of  Belshazzar,  with  which  the  fifth  chapter  clcses,  stands  in  direct 
historical  connection  with  the  statement  in  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  chapter  that  Darius  the 
Mede  had  the  kingdom  :  (4)  Darius  the  Mede  must,  therefore,  be  the  first  foreign  prince  after 
the  downfall  of  the  Chaldean  dynastj',  which  directly  reigned  over  Babylon;  (5)  the  chronolo- 
gical point,  therefore,  where  the  history  of  Belshazzar  and  of  Darius  the  Jlede  coincide,  developes 
itself:  the  account  falls  in  the  time  of  the  downfall  of  Babylon  through  the  Medo-Persian  army, 
and  this  must  be  the  occasion  as  the  connecting  fact  between  the  fifth  and  sixth  chapters. 
According  to  this,  D.arius  the  Mede  can  be  no  other  person  than  the  Medish  king  Cyaxares  II., 
the  son  and  successor  of  Astyages,  and  the  predecessor  of  Cyrus  in  the  rule  over  Babylon  ;  and 
Belshazzar  is  the  last  Chaldee  monarch,  Nahonned,  or  Labynet.  With  this  agrees  the  account 
of  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  11,  4);  and  later  this  opinion  found  an  advocate  in  Jerome. 

'The  existence  of  such  a  person  as  Cyaxai-os  II.  has  been  indeed  denied,  because,  according 
to  Herodotus  (i.  109),  and  Justin  (i.  4,  7"),  Astyages  had  no  son.  But,  it  should  he  remarked, 
that  the  latter  of  these  writers  only  copies  from  the  former,  and  what  Herodotus  states  respect- 
ing Astyages  has  so  much  the  appearance  of  fable  that  no  reliance  is  to  be  placed  on  it.  It  hag 
been  objected  also  that  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassu.s,  (B.  i.  ^  2)  says  that  the  Medish  kingdom 
•ontinued  only  through  four  reigns,  so  that  if  we  reckon  the  name;  of  the  reigning  kings,  Do 


B.C.  538.]  CHAPTER    VI.  261 

joces,  Phraortes,  Cyaxares  (the  contemporary  of  Nebuchadnezzar),  and  Astyages,  there  will  be 
no  plac-o  for  a  second  Cyaxares.  But  is  it  not  probable  that  Dionysius  meant,  by  these  words, 
only  that  the  Media  kin^idom  came  to  an  end  under  the  fourth  dynasty  V  Finally,  it  has 
been  objected  that,  according  to  Herodotus  (i.  128,  ser/.),  and  Ctesias  (UiimtK.  2  and  5),  no  Me- 
dian prince  sat  upon  the  throne  in  Ecbatana  after  Astyages,  but  that  with  Astyages  the  king- 
dom of  the  Modes  came  to  an  end,  and  with  Cyrus,  his  immediate  successor,  the  Persian  king- 
dom took  its  beginning.  Therewith  agree  nearly  all  the  histoi-ians  of  the  following  times, 
Diodorus  (ii.  34),  Justin  (i.  6,  16,  17,  Tii.  1),  Strabo  (ix.  p.  795,  xv.  p.  1662),  Polyiin  (vii.  7),  and 
many  others  15ut  these  writers  only  copy  from  Herodotus  and  Ctesias,  and  the  whole  rests 
only  on  their  authority.  But  their  credibility  in  this  point  must  be  regarded  as  doubtful,  for 
it  is  not  difficult  to  understand  the  reasons  why  they  have  omitted  to  make  mention  of  Cy- 
ax.ares  II.  They  commenced  the  history  of  the  reign  of  Cyrus  with  the  beginning  of  his  world- 
renowned  celebrity,  and  hence  it  was  natural  to  connect  the  beginning  of  his  reign,  and  the 
beginning  of  the  Persian  reign,  with  the  reign  of  his  grandfather  Astyages,  for  .so  long  as  his 
uncle  Cyaxares  II.  reigned,  he  alone  acted,  and  he  in  fact  was  the  regent.  But  if  the  silence 
of  Herodotus  and  Ctesias  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  proof  that  no  such  person  as  Cyaxares  II.  lived 
and  reigned,  there  are  in  favour  of  that  the  following  positive  arguments : 

'  (1.)  The  authority  of  Xenophon,  who  not  only  says  that  a  Cyaxares  ascended  the  throne  after 
Astyages,  but  that  he  was  a  son  of  Astyages  (Cyr.  i.  5,  2),  and  besides  relates  so  much  of  this 
Cyaxares  (i.  4,  7,  iii.  3,  20,  viii.  5,  19),  that  his  Cyropaedia  may  be  regarded  as  in  a  measure  a 
history  of  him.  Yea,  Xenophon  goes  so  far  (viii.  7,  1),  that  he  reckons  the  years  of  the  reign 
of  Cyrus  from  the  death  of  Cj'axares  II.  Can  any  one  conceive  a  reason  why  Xenophon  had  a 
motive  to  weave  together  such  a  ti.ssue  of  falsehood  as  this  unless  Cj'axarcs  II.  actually  lived  ? 
If  one  should  object,  indeed,  that  he  is  .so  far  to  be  reckoned  among  fictitious  writers  that  he 
gives  a  moral  character  to  the  subjects  on  which  he  writes,  and  that  he  has  passed  over  the  dif- 
ference between  Cj'rus  and  his  grandfather  Astyages,  yet  there  is  no  reason  why  he  should 
have  brought  upon  the  stage  so  important  a  person,  wholly  from  fiction,  as  Cjaxares.  'What 
a  degree  of  boldness  it  must  have  required,  if  he,  who  lived  not  much  more  than  a  century 
after  the  events  recorded,  had  mentioned  to  liis  contemporaries  so  much  respecting  a  prince  of 
whom  no  one  whatever  had  even  heard.    But  the  existence  of  Cyaxares  II.  may  be  proved 

'  (2.)  From  a  passage  in  .(Eschylus  (Pers.  v.  76,  seq.), 

M.r]Sos  yap  tjv  o  Tipoiro;  rjytpKOV  arfiuiTOV 
AXXoj  it  tKtivot)  jTOij  TO  0  cpyov  iji/vas' 
Tpirof  6'  aJt'  avTOU  Kvpo;,  tbaifioiv  avrip  k,  t.  \. 

The  first  who  is  here  mentioned  as  the  Mede  (Mn^oj)  is  manifestly  no  other  than  Astyages, 
whom,  before  Cyrus,  his  son  succeeded  in  the  government,  and  who  is  the  same  whom  we,  after 
Xenophon,  call  Cyaxares.  This  testimony  is  the  more  important  as  ^.schylus  lived  before 
Xenophon,  in  the  time  of  Darius  Hystaspis,  and  is  free  fi'om  all  suspicions  from  this  circum- 
stance, that  according  to  the  public  relations  which  iEschylus  sustained,  no  accounts  of  the  for- 
mer Persian  history  could  be  expected  from  any  doubtful  authorities  to  have  been  .adduced  by 
him.  But  the  existence  of  Cyaxares  II.  does  not  depend  solely  on  the  authority  of  Xenophon, 
in  hisCyropaxlia.     For 

'  (3.)  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  11,  4),  who  speaks  of  this  person  under  the  name  of  Darius,  adds 
Tju  AaTvayov  iioj,  ircpov  6c  rrapa  toij  EXXijo-iv  £Ka\etTO  opofia — 'he  was  the  son  of  Astyagea 
but  h.ad  another  name  among  the  Greeks.'  This  name,  which  he  had  among  the  Greeks,  can 
be  found  only  in  their  own  Xenophon. 

'  (4.)  To  all  this  should  be  added,  that  many  other  data  of  history,  especially  those  taken  from 
the  Hebrew  writings,  so  set  out  the  continuance  of  the  reign  of  the  >ledes  over  Upper  Asia,  that 
it  is  necessary  to  suppose  the  existence  of  such  a  person  as  the  ^Icdi.^h  king,  Cyaxares,  after  the 
reign  of  Astyages.  Had  Cyrus,  after  the  death  of  Astyages,  immediately  assumed  the  govern- 
ment over  Upper  Asia,  how  happened  it  that  until  the  downfall  of  the  Babylonian-Chaldee 
kingdom,  mention  is  made  almost  always  of  the  Medes,  or  at  least  of  the  Persians,  of  whom 
tl'.ere  is  special  mention?  'Whence  is  it  that  the  pas.sage  of  Abydenus,  quoted  from  Megas- 
thenes,  p.  295,  speaks  of  a  Mede,  who,  in  connection  with  a  Persian,  overthrew  the  Babylonish 
kingdom'?  Is  not  the  Mede  so  represented  as  to  show  that  he  was  a  prominent  and  lead- 
ing person?  Js  it  not  necessary  to  attribute  to  this  fragment  a  higher  authority,  and  to 
suppose  that  a  Medish  monarch,  in  connection  with  a  Per.'^ian,  brought  the  kingdom  of 
Babylon  to  an  end?  Whence  did  Jeremiah,  chs.  1.  and  li.,  expressly  threaten  that  the  Jews 
would  be  punished  by  a  Median  king?  Whence  does  the  author  of  Isa.  xiii.  and  xiv.  mention 
that  the  destruction  of  the  Chaldean  monarchy  would  be  effected  by  the  Medes?  The  acces 
sion  of  Cyrus  to  the  throne  was  no  mere  change  of  person  in  the  authority,  but  it  w.as  a 
change  of  the  reigning  nation.  So  long  as  a  Mede  sat  on  the  throne,  the  Persians,  though 
they  ioted  an  important  part  in  the  affairs  of  the  nation,  yet  occupied  only  the  second  pla.?e, 
The  court  was  Medish,  and  the  Medes  were  prominent  in  all  the  affairs  of  the  government,  as 
ever}'  page  of  ,.he  Cyropa?dia  furnishes  evidence.  Upon  the  accession  of  Cyrus,  the  whole  thing 
was  chanired.  The  Persians  were  now  the  predominant  nation,  and  from  that  time  onward,  as 
uas  been  reniai-ked,  the  Persians  are  always  mentioned  as  having  the  priority,  though  before  they 
had  but  a  secondary  place.    As  the  reign  of  Astyages,  though  he  reigned  thirty-five  years  (Herod 


262  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  538. 

i.  130) ,  could  not  have  embraced  the  -whole  period  mentioned  to  the  accession  of  CjTns,  bo  th« 
royal  race  of  the  Medes,  and  the  kiu{!;dom  of  the  Modes,  could  not  have  been  extinguished  with 
him,  and  it  is  necessary  to  suppose  the  existence  of  Cyaxares  II.  as  his  successor,  and  the  pre- 
decessor of  Cyrus.' 

These  con.siderations,  suggested  by  Bertholdt,  are  sufficient  to  demonstrate  that  such  a  person 
as  Cyaxares  II.  lived  between  the  reign  of  Astyages  and  Cyrus,  and  that,  after  the  destruction 
of  Babylon,  he  was  the  immediate  successor  of  Belshazzar,  or  Nabonncd,  and  was  the  prede- 
ces.sor  of  Cyrus,  lie  was  the  first  of  the  foreign  princes  wlio  reigned  over  Babylon.  It  has  been 
made  a  question  why,  in  the  Booli  of  Daniel,  he  is  mentioned  under  the  name  of  Darius,  and 
not  by  his  otlier  name  Cyaxares.  It  may  be  difficult  to  answer  this  question,  but  it  will  be 
sufficient  to  remark  (a)  that  it  was  common  for  Oriental  kings  to  have  many  names,  and,  as  we 
have  seen,  in  regard  to  the  kings  of  Babylon,  one  writer  might  designate  them  by  one  name, 
and  another  by  another.  This  is  indeed  the  occasion  of  mucli  confusion  in  ancient  history,  but 
tliis  is  inf  vitable.  (/;)  As  we  have  seen,  Jo.sephus  (Ant.  x.  11,  4)  expres.sly  says  that  this  Darius 
had  another  name  among  the  Greeks,  and,  as  Bertholdt  remarks,  it  is  natural  to  seek  that 
name  in  the  writings  of  their  own  Xenophon.  (c)  Darius  was  a  common  name  in  Persia,  and 
it  may  have  been  one  of  tlie  names  by  which  the  princes  of  Persia  and  Media  were  commonly 
known.  Three  of  that  name  are  mentioned  in  the  Scriptures,  and  three  who  were  distinguished 
are  mentioned  in  profane  history — Darius  Ilj'staspis,  Darius  Ochus.  or  Darius  Nothus,  as  he 
was  known  among  the  Greeks,  and  Darius  Codomanus,  who  was  overthrown  by  Alexander  the 
Great. 

An  important  statement  is  made  by  Xenophon  respecting  Cyaxares  IT.,  the  son  of  Astyages, 
which  may  account  for  the  fact  that  his  name  was  omitted  by  Herodotus  and  Ctesias.  He  de- 
scribes liim  as  a  prince  given  up  to  sensuality,  and  this  fact  explains  the  reason  why  he  came 
to  surrender  all  authority  bo  entirely  into  the  hands  of  his  enterprising  son-in-law  and  nephew 
Cyrus,  and  why  his  reign  was  naturally  sunk  in  that  of  his  distinguished  successor.  Cyrop. 
i.  .5,  viii.  7. 

2  3.   ANALYSIS  OP  THE  CHAPTER. 

Tliis  chapter  contains  the  history  of  Daniel  undor  the  government,  or  during  the  reign  of 
Darius  the  Mede.  or  Cyaxares  II.,  from  a  period,  it  would  seem,  soon  after  the  accession  of 
Darius  to  the  throne  in  Babylon,  or  tlie  conquest  of  Babylon,  till  his  death.  It  is  not  indeed 
said  liow  soon  after  that  event  Daniel  was  exalted  to  the  premiership  in  Babylon,  but  the  nar- 
rative would  lead  us  to  suppose  that  it  was  soon  after  the  conquest  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus,  acting 
under  tbe  authority  of  Cyaxares.  As  Daniel,  on  account  of  the  disclosure  made  to  Belshazzar 
of  tlie  meaning  of  the  handwriting  on  the  wall,  had  been  exalted  to  high  honour  at  the  close 
of  tlie  life  of  that  monarch  (ch.  v.),  it  is  probable  that  he  would  be  called  to  a  similar  station 
under  tlie  reign  of  Dariu.s.  as  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  Darius  would  appoint  Medes  and  Per- 
sians entirely  to  fill  the  high  offices  of  the  realm.  The  chapter  contains  a  record  of  the  follow- 
ing events:  (1)  Tlie  arrangement  of  the  government  after  the  conquest  of  Babylon,  consisting 
of  one  liundred  and  twenty  officers  over  the  kingdom,  so  divided  as  to  be  placed  under  the  care 
of  three  superior  officers,  or  '  presidents,'  of  whom  Daniel  held  the  first  place,  vs.  1—3.  (2)  The 
dissatisfaction  or  envy  of  the  officers  so  appointed,  against  Daniel,  for  causes  now  unknown,  and 
their  con.spiracy  to  remove  him  from  office,  or  to  bring  him  into  disgrace  with  the  king,  ver.  4. 
(3)  The  plan  which  tliey  formed  to  secure  this,  derived  from  the  known  piety  and  integrity  of 
Daniel,  and  their  conviction  that,  at  any  hazard,  he  would  remain  firm  to  his  religious  princi- 
ples, and  would  conscientiously  maintain  the  worship  of  God.  Convinced  that  they  could  find 
no  fault  in  his  admini.stration;  that  ho  could  not  be  convicted  of  malversation  or  infidelity  in 
office  ;  that  there  was  nothing  in  his  private  or  public  character  that  was  contrary  to  justice  and 
integrity,  they  resolved  to  take  advantage  of  his  well-known  piety,  and  to  make  that  the  occasion 
of  liis  downfall  and  ruin,  ver.  5.  (4)  The  plan  that  was  artfully  propo.<Jed  was,  to  induce  the 
king  to  sign  a  decree  that  if  any  one  for  thirty  days  should  ask  any  petition  for  anything  of 
God  or  man,  he  should  be  thrown  into  a  den  of  lions — that  is,  .should  be.  as  they  supposed, 
certainly  put  to  death.  This  proposed  decree  they  apprehended  they  could  induce  the  king  to 
sign,  perhaps  because  it  was  flattering  to  the  monarch,  or  perhaps  because  it  would  test  the 
disposition  of  his  new  subjects  to  obey  him,  or  perliaps  because  they  Knew  he  was  a  weak  and 
effeminate  prince,  and  that  he  was  accustomed  to  sign  papers  presented  to  him  by  his  coun- 
sellors without  mucli  reflection  or  hesitation,  vs.  C — 9.  (5)  Daniel,  when  he  was  apprised  of  the 
contents  of  the  decree,  though  he  saw  its  bearing,  and  perhaps  its  design,  yet  continued  his 
devotions  as  usxial — praying,  as  he  was  known  to  do,  three  times  a  day,  with  his  face  toward 
Jerusalem,  with  his  windows  open.  The  case  was  one  where  he  felt,  \indoubtedly,  that  it 
.>as  a  matter  of  principle  that  he  should  worship  God  in  his  \isual  manner,  and  not  allow  him- 
self to  be  driven  from  the  acknowledgment  of  his  God  by  the  fear  of  death,  ver.  10.  (C)  They 
who  had  laid  the  plan,  made  report  of  this  to  the  king,  and  demanded  the  execution  of  the 
uf'cree.  The  case  was  a  plUn  one,  for  though  it  had  not  been  intended  or  expected  by  the 
king  that  Daniel  would  have  been  found  a  violator  of  the  law,  j'et  as  the  decree  was  positive, 
and  tiicre  had  been  no  concealment  on  the  part  of  Daniel,  the  counsellors  urged  that  it  was 
necessary  that  the  decree  should  be  executed,  vs.  11 — 13.  (7)  The  king,  displeased  with  him- 
felf.  and  evidently  enraged  against  these  crafty  counsellors,  desirous  of  sparing  Daniel,  and  ye( 
fci;iing  the  necessity  of  maintaining  a  law  positively  enacted,  sought  some  way  by  which  Daniel 
Blight  be  saved,  and  the  honour  and  majesty  of  the  law  preserved.  No  method,  however,  oc- 
turring  to  him  of  securing  both  objects,  he  was  constrained  to  submit  to  the  execution  of  the 


B.  C.  538.J 


CHAPTER    VI. 


2G3 


decree,  and  ordered  Daniel  to  be  cast  into  the  den  of  lions,  vs.  14 — 17.  (8)  The  king  returned 
to  his  palace,  and  passed  the  night  fasting,  and  overwhelmed  with  sadness,  ver.  18.  \9)  In  tho 
morning  he  came  with  deep  anxiety  to  the  place  where  Daniel  had  heen  thrown,  and  called  to 
see  if  he  were  alive,  vs.  19,  20.  (10)  The  reply  of  Daniel,  that  he  had  been  preserved  by  th« 
intervention  of  an  angel,  who  had  closed  the  mouths  of  the  lion.s,  and  had  kept  him  alive, 
vs.  21,  22.  (11)  The  release  of  Daniel  from  the  den,  and  the  command  to  cast  those  in  who  had 
thus  accused  Daniel,  and  who  had  sought  his  ruin,  vs.  23,  24.  (12)  An  appropriate  proclama- 
tion from  the  king  to  all  men  to  honour  that  God  who  had  thus  preserved  his  servant,  vs, 
25 — 27.    (13)  A  statement  of  the  prosperity  of  Daniel,  extending  to  the  reign  of  Cyru.s,  ver.  28. 


1  It  pleased  Darius  to  set  ^  over  (  2  And  over  these,  three  prebi- 
the  kingdom  an  hundred  and  twenty!  dents,  of  whom  Daniel  was  first; 
''princes,  which  should  be  over  the'  that  the  princes  might  give  accounts 
whole  kingdom. 


1.  It  pleaned  Darius  to  set  over  the 
kiiKjdom.  Evidently  over  the  kiugdom 
of  Babylon,  now  united  to  that  of  Media 
and  Persia.  As  this  was  now  subject  to 
him,  and  tributary  to  him,  it  would  be 
natural  to  appoint  persons  over  it  in 
whom  he  could  confide,  for  the  adminis- 
tration of  justice,  for  the  collection  of 
revenue,  ic.  Others,  however,  suppose 
that  this  i-elates  to  the  whole  kingdom  of 
Persia,  but  as  the  reference  here  is  mainly 
to  what  was  the  kingdom  of  Babj'lon,  it  is 
rather  to  be  presumed  that  this  is  what 
is  particularly  alluded  to.  Besides,  it  is 
hardly  probable  that  he  would  have  exalted 
Daniel,  a  Jew,  and  a  resident  in  Baby- 
lon, to  so  important  a  post  as  that  of 
the  premiership  over  the  whole  empire, 
though  from  his  position  and  standing  in 
Babylon  there  is  no  improbability  in 
oupposing  that  he  might  have  occupied, 
under  the  reign  of  Darius,  a  place  similar 
to  that  which  ho  had  occupied  under  Nebu- 
chadnezzar and  Belshazzar.  In  dividing 
the  kingdom  into  provinces,  and  placing 
officers  over  each  department,  Darius 
followed  the  same  plan  which  Xenophon 
tells  us  that  Cyrus  did  over  the  nations 
conquered  by  him,  Cyrop.  viii.  E'd6«i 
durcj  oarpairai  )']6ri   ■ni^miv   hi    ra   KaTtarpaji- 

fiina  t'ivTt :  '  It  seemed  good  to  him  to 
appoint  satraps  over  the  conquered  na- 
tions.' Comp.  Esth.  i.  1.  Archbishop 
Usher  (Annal.  vol.  i.  p.  82)  thinks  that 
the  plan  was  first  instituted  by  Cyrus, 
and  was  followed  at  his  suggestion.  It 
was  a  measure  of  obvious  prudence  in 
order  to  maintain  so  extended  an  empire 
in  subjection.  ^  An  hundred  and  twenti/ 
princes.  The  word  hero  rendered 2:irinccs — 
'*;i?")!'V'nx,  occurs  only  in  Daniel  in  the 
Chaldee  form,  though  in  the  Hebrew 
form  it  is  found  in  the  book  of  Esther 


bEs.  1. 1. 


(iii.  12,  viii.  9,  ix.  3),  and  in  Ezra  (viii. 
36) :  in  Esther  and  Ezra  uniformly  ren- 
dered lieutenantt.  In  Daniel  (iii.  2,  3, 
27,  vi.  1,  2,  3,  4,  6,  7,)  it  is  as  uniformly 
rendered  princes.  It  is  a  word  of  Per- 
sian origin,  and  is  probably  the  Hebrew 
mode  of  pronouncing  the  Persian  word 
satrap,  or,  as  Gesenius  supposes,  the  Per- 
sian word  was  pronounced — hsatrap.  For 
the  etymology  of  the  word,  see  Gesenius, 
Lex.  The  word  undoubtedly  refers  to 
the  Persian  satrajys,  or  governors,  or  vice- 
roys in  the  large  provinces  of  the  em- 
pire, possessing  both  civil  and  military 
powers.  They  were  ofiicers  high  in  rank, 
and  being  the  representatives  of  the 
sovereign,  they  rivalled  his  state  and 
splendor.  Single  parts,  or  subdivisions 
of  these  provinces,  were  under  inferior 
ofiicers ;  the  satraps  governed  whole  pro- 
vinces. The  word  is  rendered  satrajis 
in  the  Greek,  and  the  Latin  Vulgate. 

2.  And  over  these  three  2^>'esidcnts : 
P5")D.  This  word  is  found  only  in  the 
plural.  The  etymology  is  uncertain,  but 
its  meaning  is  not  doubtful.  The  word 
president  expresses  it  with  sufiicient  ac- 
curacy, denoting  a  high  officer  that  pre- 
sided over  others.  It  is  not  improbable 
that  these  presided  over  distinct  depart- 
ments, corresponding  somewhat  to  what 
are  now  called  'Secretaries' — as  Secreta- 
ries of  State,  of  the  Treasurj-,  of  Foreign 
Aflairs,  &c.,  though  this  is  not  particularly 
specified.  ^  Of  irhom  Daniel  was  first. 
First  in  rank.  This  office  ho  probably 
held  from  the  rank  which  he  was  known 
to  have  occupied  under  the  kings  of  Baby- 
lon, and  on  account  of  his  reputation  for 
ability  and  integrity.  \  That  the  princes 
might  (jive  accounts  unto  them.  Be  im- 
mediately responsible  to  them;  the  ac 
counts  of  their  own  administrationj  and 


264 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  537. 


unto   them,   and  » the  king  should  i  him ;  and  the  king  thought  to  set 
have  no  damage.  I  him  over  the  whole  realm. 

3  Then  this  Daniel  was  preferred  I      4    ^  Then    c  the    presidents    and 
above   the   presidents  and  princes,  i  princes   ''  sought    to    find   occasion 

against  Daniel  concerning  the  king- 


because  an  excellent  ^  spirit  was  in 

»  Lu.  19. 13,  &c.  1  Co.  4.  2.       bPr.l7.2T.   c5.12. 

of  the  state  of  the  empire.  %  And  the  | 
king  should  have  no  damar/e.  Either  in  ' 
the  loss  of  revenue,  or  in  any  mal-admin-  1 
istration  of  the  affairs.  Comp.  Ezra  iv.  1 
13.  ."They  pay  not  toll,  tribute,  and  i 
custom,  and  so  thou  shalt  endamage  the 
revenue  of  the  kings."  The  king  was 
regarded  as  the  source  of  all  power,  and  j 
as  in  fact  the  supreme  proprietor  of  the  ] 
realm,  and  any  malfeasance  or  malversa- 
tion in  office  was  regarded  as  an  injury 
to  him. 

3.  Then  this  Daniel  teas  preferred 
above  the  presidents  and  princes.  That 
is,  he  was  at  their  head,  or  was  placed 
in  rank  and  office  over  them.  *\  Because 
an  excellent  S2}irit  was  in  him.  This  may 
refer  alike  to  his  wisdom  and  his  inte- 
gritj' — both  of  which  would  be  necessary 
in  such  an  office.  It  was  an  office  of 
great  difficultj-  and  responsibility  to  man- 
age the  affairs  of  the  empire  in  a  proper 
manner,  and  required  the  talents  of  an 
accomplished  statesman,  and,  at  the  same 
time,  as  it  was  an  office  where  confidence 
was  reposed  by  the  sovereign  it  de- 
manded integrity.  The  word  'excellent' — 
K"i\-i; — means  properly  that  which  hangs 
over,  or  which  is  abundant,  or  more  than 
enough,  and  then  anything  that  is  very 
great,  excellent,  pre-eminent.  Lat.  Vulg. 
Spiritus  Dei  Amplior — 'the  spirit  of 
God  more  abundantly.'  Gr.  TTiitviia  ncpiocov. 
It  is  not  said  here  to  what  trial  of  his 
abilities  and  integrity  Daniel  was  sub- 
jected before  he  was  thus  exalted,  but  it 
is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  any  such 
trial  occurred  at  once,  or  immediately  on 
the  accession  of  Darius.  Probably,  as  he 
was  found  in  office  as  appointed  by  Bel- 
shazzar,  he  was  continued  by  Darius, 
and  as  a  result  of  his  tried  integrity  was 
in  due  time  exalted  to  the  premiership. 
^  And  the  king  thought  to  set  him  over  the 
whole  realm.  The  whole  kingdom  over 
which  he  presided,  embracing  Media, 
Persia,  Babylonia,  and  all  the  dependent, 
conquered  provinces.  This  shows  that 
the  princes  referred  to  in  ver.  1,  were 
those  which  wore  appointed  over  Baby- 


d  Ps.  37. 12,  &c. 


Ionia,  since  Daniel  (ver.  2,)  was  already 
placed  at  the  head  of  all  these  princes. 
Yet,  in  consequcBce  of  his  talents  and 
fidelity  the  king  was  meditating  the  im- 
portant measure  of  placing  him  over  the 
whole  united  kingdom  as  premier.  That 
he  should  form  such  a  purpose  in  re- 
gard to  an  officer  so  talented  and  faithful 
as  Daniel  was,  is  by  no  means  improlwi- 
ble.  The  Greek  of  Theodotion  renders 
this  as  if  it  were  actually  done — koi  b 
(SaaiXtVi  KariaTTiatv  olvtov  k.  t.  X. — 'And 
the  king  placed  him  over  all  his  king- 
dom.' But  the  Chaldee — n^p'j; — indi- 
cates rather  a  purpose  or  intention  to  do 
it;  or  rather,  perhaps,  that  he  was  actu- 
ally making  arrangements  to  do  this. 
Probably  it  was  the  fact  that  this  design 
was  perceived,  and  that  the  arrangements 
were  actually  commenced,  that  aroused 
the  envy  and  the  ill-will  of  his  fellow- 
officers,  and  induced  them  to  determine 
on  his  ruin. 

4.  Tlien  the  presidents  and  prince* 
sought  to  find  occasion  against  Daniel 
The  word  rendered  occasion — nS>'  — 
means  a  pretext  or  pretence.  "Tha 
Arabs  use  the  word  of  any  business  or 
affair  which  serves  as  a  cause  or  pretext 
for  neglecting  another  business."  Gese- 
nius,  Lex.  The  meaning  is,  that  they 
sought  to  find  some  plausible  pretext  or 
reason  in  respect  to  Daniel  by  which  the 
contemplated  ap]X)intment  might  bo  pre- 
vented, and  by  which  he  might  be  effec- 
tually humbled.  No  one  who  is  ac- 
quainted with  the  intrigues  of  cabinets 
and  courts  can  have  any  doubts  as  to  the 
probability  of  what  is  here  stated.  No- 
thing has  been  more  common  in  the 
world  than  intrigues  of  this  kind  to  hum- 
ble a  rival,  and  to  bring  down  those  who 
are  meritorious  to  a  state  of  degradation. 
The  cause  of  the  plot  here  laid  seems  to 
have  been  mere  envy  and  jealousy — and 
perhaps  by  the  consideration  that  Daniel 
was  a  foreigner,  and  was  one  of  a  de- 
spised people  held  in  captivity.  %  Con- 
cerning the  kingdom.  In  respect  to  the 
administration  of  the  kingdom.     Thej 


6.  C.  537.] 


CHAPTER   VI, 


265 


uom  ;  but  they  could  find  none  oc- 1  not  find  any  occasion  aguit  st  this 
casion  nor  fault ;  forasmuch  as  he  Daniol,  except  wo  find  it  against 
was  faithful,  neith'T  was  there  any  him  concerning  the  law  of  hia  God. 
error  or  fault  found  in  him.  i    G  Then  these  presidents  and  princes 

5  Then  said  these  men,  We  shall  [ "  assembled  together  to  the  kin^,  and 

i  ^  or,  came  tumulluoiisly. 

prohibited  by  the  laws  of  the  realm,  and 
it  would  not  be  easy  to  procure  a  law 
directly  and  avowedly  prohibiting  that. 
It  is  not  probable  that  the  king  would 
have  consented  to  pass  such  a  law  di- 
rectly projioscd — a  law  which  would 
have  been  so  likely  to  produce  disturb- 
ance, and  when  no  plausible  ground 
could  have  been  alleged  for  it.  There 
was  another  method,  however,  which 
suggested  itself  to  these  crafty  counsel- 
lors— which  was,  while  they  did  not  seem 
to  aim  absolutely  and  directly  to  have 
that  worship  prohibited,  to  approach  the 
king  with  a  proposal  that  would  be  flat- 
tering to  his  vanity,  and  that,  perhaps, 
might  bo  suggested  as  a  test  question, 
showing  the  degree  of  esteem  with  which 
he  was  held  in  the  empire,  and  the  wil- 
lingness of  his  subjects  to  obey  him. 
By  proposing  a  law  that,  for  a  limited 
period,  no  one  should  be  allowed  to  present 
a  petition  of  any  kind  to  any  one  except 
to  the  king  himself,  the  object  would  bo 
accomplished.  A  vain  monarch  could  be 
prevailed  on  to  pass  such  a  law,  and  this 
could  be  represented  to  him  as  a  measure 
not  improper,  in  order  to  test  his  subjects 
as  to  their  willingness  to  show  him  re- 
spect and  obedience,-  and  at  the  same 
time  it  would  be  certain  to  effect  the  pur- 
pose against  Daniel — for  tney  had  no 
doubt  that  ho  would  adhere  "stedfastly 
to  the  principles  of  his  religion,  and  to 
his  well-known  habits  of  worship.  This 
plan  was,  therefore,  crafty  in  the  e.x- 
treme,  and  was  the  highest  tribute  thai 
could  be  paid  to  Daniel.  It  would  bo 
well  if  the  religious  character,  and  the 
fixed  habits  of  all  who  profess  religion 
were  so  well  understood  that  it  was  ab- 
solutely certain  that  no  accusation  could 
lie  against  them  on  any  other  ground, 
but  that  their  adherence  to  their  reli- 
gious principles  could  bo  calculated  on 
as  a  basis  of  action,  whatever  might  bo 
the  consequences. 

6.  Then  these  presidents  and  princes  aa- 
scmhled  together.  Marg.,  came  tnmultu. 
ously.  The  margin  expresses  the  propel 
meaning  of  the  original  word —  U'j-) fa> 


fought  to  find  evidence  of  malversation 
in  office,  or  abuse  of  power,  or  attempts 
a)  personal  aggrandizement,  or  inatten- 
tion to  ':he  duties  of  the  office.  This  is 
lirerally  'from  the  side  of  the  kingdom;' 
and  the  meaning  is,  that  the  accusation 
was  sought  in  that  ([uarter,  or  in  that  re- 
spect. No  other  charge  would  bo  likely 
to  bo  effectu.il,  except  one  which  pertained 
to  maladministration  in  office.  ^  But 
the;/  could  find  none  occasion  nor  faidt. 
This  is  an  honourable  testimony  to  the 
fidelity  of  Daniel,  and  the  uprightness 
of  his  character.  If  there  had  been  any 
malversation  in  office,  it  would  have  been 
detected  by  these  men. 

5.  We  shall  not  find  any  occasion,  &c. 
Wo  shall  not  find  any  pretext,  or  any 
cause  by  which  he  may  be  humbled  and 
degraded.  They  were  satisfied  of  his 
integrity,  and  they  saw  it  was  vain  to 
hope  to  accomplish  their  purposes  by  any 
attack  on  his  moral  character,  or  any 
charge  against  him  in  respect  to  the  man- 
ner in  which  he  had  discharged  the  du- 
ties of  his  office.  •[  Except  ue  find  it 
against  him  concerning  the  law  of  his 
God.  Unless  it  bo  in  respect  to  his  reli- 
gion ;  unless  we  can  so  construe  his 
known  conscientiousness  in  regard  to  his 
religion  as  to  make  that  a  proof  of  his 
unwillingness  to  obey  the  king.  It 
occurred  to  them  that  such  was  his 
well-understood  faithfulness  in  his  reli- 
gious duties,  and  his  conscientiousness, 
that  they  might  expect  that,  whatever 
should  occur,  he  would  be  found  true  to 
his  God,  and  that  this  might  be  a  basis 
of  calculation  in  any  measure  they  might 
propose  for  his  downfall.  liis  habits 
seem  to  have  been  well  understood, 
and  his  character  was  so  fixed,  that 
they  could  proceed  on  this  as  a  set. 
tied  matter  in  their  plans  against  him. 
The  only  question  was,  hoio  to  con- 
strue his  conduct  in  this  respect  as 
criminal,  or  hoio  to  make  the  king  listen 
tc  an^  iccusation  against  him  on  this 
accoant,  for  his  religious  views  were  well  j 
known  when  he  was  appointed  to  office;  j 
the  worship  of  the  God  of  Daniel  was  not ! 
28 


266 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  537 


taid  thus  unto  him,  King  Darius,  j  the  counsellors,  and   the   captains, 
live  » for  over.  j  have  consulted  together  ^  to  egtablish 

7  All  the  presidents  of  the  king-  a  royal  statute,  and  to  make  a  firm 


dom,  the  governors,  and  the  princes, 
'Ne.  2.  3;  ver.  21. 

run  together  icith  tumult.  W/iy  they  came 
together  in  that  manner  is  not  stated. 
BertholJt  suggests  that  it  means  that 
tbey  came  in  a  procession,  or  in  a  body, 
to  the  king;  but  there  is  undoubtedly  the 
idea  of  their  doing  it  with  haste,  or  with 
an  appearance  of  great  earnestness  or  ex- 
citement. Perhaps  they  imagined  that 
they  would  be  more  likely  to  carry  the 
measure  if  proposed  as  something  that 
demanded  immediate  action,  or  something 
wherein  it  appeared  that  the  very  safety  of 
the  king  was  involved,  than  if  it  were  pro- 
posed in  a  sedate  and  calm  manner.  If  it 
were  suggested  in  such  a  way  as  to  seem  to 
admit  of  deliberation,  perhaps  the  suspicion 
of  the  king  might  be  aroused,  or  he  might 
have  asked  questions  as  to  the  ground  of 
the  necessity  of  such  alaw,  which  it  might 
not  have  been  easy  to  answer.  •[  A7m/ 
Darius,  live  forever.  The  usual  way  of 
saluting  a  monarch.  See  Notes  ch.  ii.  4. 

7.  All  the  presidents  of  the  Jci)igdom, 
the  governors,  &c.  Several  functionaries 
are  enumerated  here  which  are  not  in  the 
previous  verses,  as  having  entered  into 
the  conspiracy.  It  is  possible,  indeed, 
that  all  these  different  classes  of  officers 
had  been  consulted,  and  had  concurred  in 
asking  the  enactment  of  the  proposed  law, 
but  it  is  much  more  probable  that  the 
leaders  merely  represented  or  affirmed 
what  is  here  said  in  order  to  be  more 
certain  of  the  enactment  of  the  law.  If 
represented  as  proposed  by  all  the  offi- 
cers of  the  realm,  they  appear  to  have 
conceived  that  there  would  be  no  hesita- 
tion on  the  part  of  Darius  in  granting  the 
request.  They  could  not  but  be  con- 
scious that  it  was  an  unusual  request,  and 
that  it  might  appear  unreasonable,  and 
hence  they  seem  to  have  used  every  pre- 
caution to  make  the  passage  of  the  law 
certain.  ^  Have  consulted  together  to  es- 
tablish a  royal  statute.  Or,  that  such  a 
st?.tute  might  be  established.  They  knew 
Xhs^X  it  could  be  established  only  by  the 
king  himself,  but  they  were  in  the  habit, 
doixbtless,  of  recommending  such  laws  as 
they  supposed  would  be  for  the  good  of 
Ihe  realm.     <T  And  to  make  a  Jirm  decree. 


"^  decree,  that  whosoever  shall  ask  a 

^  Ps.  2.  2.  e  or,  itUerdicC. 


Marg.,  interdict.  The  word  used —  nDX  — . 
from  1?N,  to  bind,  make  fast,  means  pro- 
perly a  binding;  then  anything  which  ia 
binding  or  obligator}' — as  a  prohibition,  an 
interdict,  alaw.  ^  Thai  whosoever  shall  ask. 
Any  one  of  any  rank.  The  real  purpose 
was  to  involve  Daniel  in  disgrace,  but  in 
order  to  do  this  it  was  necessary  to  mako 
the  prohibition  universal — as  Herod,  in 
order  to  be  sure  that  he  had  cut  oft"  the 
infant  king  of  the  Jews,  was  under  a  ne- 
cessity of  destroying  all  the  children  in 
the  place.  \\  Of  any  god  or  man.  This 
would  include  all  the  gods  acknowledged 
in  Babylon,  and  all  foreign  divinities. 
^^  For  thirty  days.  The  object  of  this 
limitation  of  time  was  perhaps  two-fold  ; 
(1)  They  would  be  sure  to  accomplish 
their  purpose  in  regard  to  Daniel,  for 
they  understood  his  principles  and  habits 
so  well  that  they  had  no  doubt  that  within 
that  time  he  would  be  found  engaged  in 
the  worship  of  his  God,  and  (2)  it  would 
not  do  to  make  the  law  perpetual,  and 
to  make  it  binding  longer  than  thirty 
days  might  expose  them  to  the  danger 
of  popular  tumults.  It  was  easy  enough 
to  see  that  such  a  law  could  not  be  long 
enforced,  j'et  they  seem  to  have  supposed 
that  the  people  would  acquiesce  in  it  for 
so  brief  a  period  as  one  month.  Unrea- 
sonable though  it  might  be  regarded,  yet 
for  so  short  a  space  of  time  it  might  be 
expected  that  it  would  be  patiently  sub- 
mitted to.  ^  Save  of  thee,  0  king.  Perhaps 
either  directly,  or  through  some  minister 
of  the  realm.  ^ //e  shall  be  cast  into  the 
den  of  lions.  The  word  den — 3'J  — means 
properly  a  pit,  or  cistern,  and  the  idea  is 
that  the  den  was  under  ground,  probably 
a  cave  constructed  for  that  purpose.  It 
was  made  with  so  narrow  an  entrance 
that  it  could  be  covered  with  a  stone  and 
made  perfectly  secure,  ver.  17.  '  The  en- 
closure of  wild  beasts,'  says  Bertboldt, 
pp.  397,  39S,  '  especially  of  lions,  which  the 
kings  of  Asia  and  of  Northwestern  Africa 
formerly  had,  as  they  have  at  the  present 
day,  were  generally  constructed  under 
ground,  but  were  ordinarily  caves  which 
had  been  escftvated  for  the  purpose,  walled 


B.  C.  537.] 


CHAPTER   VI 


2G7 


petition  of  any  god  or  man  for  thirty 
days,  save  of  thee,  0  king,  he  shall 
be  cast  into  the  den  of  lions. 

up  at  the  sides,  enclosed  within  a  wall 
through  which  a  door  led  from  the  outer 
wall  to  the  space  Ij'ing  between  the  walls, 
within  which  persons  could  pass  round 
and  contemplate  the  wild  beasts.'  '  The 
emperor  of  Morocco,'  says  Host  (Beschrei- 
bung  Von  Morokos  und  Fetz,  p.  290,  as 
quoted  in  Rosenmiillcr's  Jlorgenland,  in 
loc),  '  has  a  cave  for  lions — Lowcngriibe — 
into  which  men  sometimes,  and  especially 
Jews,  are  cast;  but  they  commonly  came 
up  again  uninjured,  for  the  overseers  of 
the  lions  are  commonly  Jews,  and  they 
have  a  sharp  instrument  in  their  hands, 
and  with  this  they  can  pass  among  them, 
if  they  are  careful  to  keep  their  faces  to- 
wards the  lions,  for  a  lion  will  not  allow  one 
to  turn  his  back  to  him.  The  other  Jews 
will  not  allow  their  brethren  to  remain 
longer  in  such  a  cave  than  one  night,  for 
the  lions  would  be  too  hungry,  but  they 
redeem  their  brethren  out  of  the  cave  by 
the  payment  of  money — which,  in  fact,  is 
the  object  of  the  emperor.'  In  another 
place  (p.  77,)  he  describes  one  of  these 
caves.  '  In  one  end  of  the  enclosure  is  a 
place  for  ostriches  and  their  young  ones, 
and  at  the  other  end  towards  the  moun- 
tain is  a  cave  for  lions,  which  stands  in  a 
large  cavern  in  the  earth  that  has  a  di- 
vision wall,  in  the  midst  of  which  is  a 
door,  which  the  Jews  who  have  the  charge 
of  the  lions  can  open  and  close  from  above, 
and,  by  means  of  food,  they  entice  the 
lions  from  one  room  into  another,  that  they 
may  have  the  opportunity  of  cleaning  the 
cage.  It  is  all  under  the  open  sky.'  Un- 
der what  pretext  the  crafty  counsellors 
induced  the  king  to  ratify  this  statute  is 
not  stated.  Some  one  or  all  of  the  fol- 
lowing things  may  have  induced  the 
monarch  to  sign  the  decree  :  (1)  The  law 
proposed  was  in  a  high  degree  flattering 
to  the  king,  and  he  may  have  been  ready 
at  once  to  sign  a  decree  which  for  the 
time  gave  him  a  supremacy  over  gods  and 
men.  If  Alexander  the  Great  desired  to 
be  adored  as  a  god,  then  it  is  not  impro- 
bable that  a  proud  and  weak  Persian 
monarch  would  be  willing  to  receive  a 
similar  tribute.  Xerxes  did  things  more 
foolish  than  what  is  here  attributed  to 
Darius.  Instances  of  this  are  not  want- 
aig.     Of  Holcferues,  in  Judith  iii.  8,  it  is 


8  Now,  O  king,  establish  the  de- 
cree, and  sign  the  writing,  that  it  be 
not  changed,  according  to  the  law 


said  that  he  "had  decreed  to  destroy  all 
the  gods  of  the  land,  that  all  nations 
should  worship  Nabuchodonosor  only, and 
that  all  tongues  and  tribes  should  call 
upon  him  as  god."  (2)  It  may  have  oc- 
curred to  him,  or  may  have  been  sug- 
gested, that  this  was  an  effectual  way  to 
test  the  readiness  of  his  subjects  to  obey 
and  honour  him.  Some  such  test,  it  may 
have  been  urged,  was  not  improper,  and 
this  would  determine  what  was  the  spirit 
of  obedience  as  well  as  any  other. 
(3)  More  probablj',  however,  it  may  have 
been  represented  that  there  was  some 
danger  of  insubordination,  or  some  con- 
spiracy among  the  people,  and  that  it  was 
necessary  that  the  sovereign  should  issue 
some  mandate  which  would  at  once  and 
effectually  quell  it.  It  may  have  been 
urged  that  there  was  danger  of  a  revolt, 
and  that  it  would  be  an  effectual  way  of 
preventing  it  to  order  that  whoever  should 
solicit  any  favour  of  any  one  but  the  king 
should  be  punished,  for  this  would  bring 
all  matters  at  once  before  bira,  and  secure 
order.  The  haste  and  earnestness  with 
which  they  urged  their  request,  would 
rather  seem  to  imply  that  there  was  a 
representation  that  some  sudden  occasion 
had  arisen  which  made  the  enactment  of 
such  a  statute  proper.  Or  (4)  the  king 
may  have  been  in  the  habit  of  signing 
the  decrees  proposed  by  bis  counsellors 
with  little  hesitation,  and,  lost  in  ease  and 
sensualit}',  and  perceiving  only  that  this 
proposed  law  was  flattering  to  himself, 
and  not  deliberating  on  what  might  be  its 
possible  result,  he  may  have  sigeed  it  at 
once. 

8,  9.  Now,  0  hinrj,  cstablisJi.  the  decree. 
Ordain,  enact,  contirra  it.  *i^  And  sir/n  the 
icritinr/.  An  act  necessary  to  make  it  the 
law  of  the  realm.  ^  That  it  be  not  changed. 
That,  having  the  sign  manual  of  the  sove- 
reign, it  might  bo  so  confirmed  that 
it  could  not  be  changed.  With  that 
sign  it  became  so  established,  it  seems, 
that  even  the  sovereign  himself  could  not 
change  it.  If  According  to  the  law  of  the 
Medes  and  Persians,  )ckich  altereth  not. 
Marg.,  passcth.  "Which  does  not  2)aa» 
away  ;  which  is  not  abrogated.  A  simi- 
lar fact  in  regard  to  a  law  of  the  Medes 
and  Persians  is  mentioned  in  Esther  viii., 


268 


DANIEL. 


LB.  0.  537. 


»of  theMedes  and  Persians,  which  I     10    ^  Now    when    Daniel    knew 

•"altereth  not.  ["^that   the   writing   was   signed,  ho 

9  Wherefore  king  Darius  signed  i  went  into  his  house;  and  his  win- 

the  writing  and  the  decree.  !  dows   being  open   in  liis   cliamber 

»Es.  1. 19 ;  8.  8.  ''  passdh.  c  Lu.  14.  26.    Ac.  4. 17—19. 


in  which  the  king  was  unable  to  recall  an 
order  which  had  been  given  for  the  mas- 
sacre of  the  Jews,  and  in  which  he  at- 
tempted only  to  counteract  it  as  far  as 
possible  by  putting  the  Jews  on  their 
guard,  and  allowing  them  to  defend  them- 
selves. Diodorus  Siculus  (Lib.  iv.,)  refers 
to  this  custom,  where  he  says  that  Darius, 
the  last  king  of  Persia,  would  have  par- 
doned Charidemus  after  he  was  con- 
demned to  death,  but  could  not  reverse 
what  the  law  had  passed  against  him. 
Loieth.  '  When  the  king  of  Persia,  says 
Montesquieu  (Spirit  of  Laws,  as  quoted 
by  Rosenmiiller,  Morgenland,  -in  loc.)  has 
condemned  any  one  to  death,  no  one  dares 
speak  to  him  to  make  intercession  for 
him.  Were  he  even  drunk  when  the 
crime  was  committed,  or  were  he  insane, 
the  command  must  nevertheless  be  exe- 
cuted, for  the  law  cannot  be  counter- 
manded, and  the  laws  cannot  contradict 
themselves.  This  sentiment  prevails 
throughout  Persia.'  It  may  seem  singu- 
lar that  such  a  custom  prevailed,  and  that 
the  king,  who  was  the  fountain  of  law, 
and  whose  will  was  law,  could  not  change 
a  statute  at  his  pleasure.  But  this  cus- 
tom grew  out  of  the  opinions  which  pre- 
vailed in  the  East  in  regard  to  the  mon- 
arch. His  will  was  absolute,  and  it  was 
a  part  of  the  system  which  prevailed  then 
to  exalt  the  monarch,  and  leave  the  im- 
pression on  the  mind  of  the  people  that 
he  was  more  than  a  man — that  he  was 
infallible  and  could  not  err.  Nothing  was 
better  adapted  to  keep  up  that  impression 
than  an  established  principle  of  this  kind 
■ — that  a  law  once  ordained  could  not  bo 
repealed  or  changed.  To  du  i1iis  would 
be  a  practical  acknowledgment  that  there 
was  a  defect  in  the  law  ;  that  there  was  a 
want  of  wisdom  in  ordaining  it;  that  all 
the  circumstances  were  not  foreseen  ;  and 
that  the  king  was  liable  to  be  deceived 
and  to  err.  With  all  the  disadvantages 
attending  such  a  custom,  it  was  judged 
better  to  maintain  it  than  to  allow  that 
the  monarch  could  err,  .and  hence  when 
a  law  was  ordained  it  became  fixed  and 
unchanging.  Even  the  king  himself 
tould  not  altsr  it,  and  whatever  might  be 


the  consequences,  it  was  to  be  executed. 
It  is  evident,  however,  that  such  a  cus- 
tom might  have  some  advantages.  It 
would  serve  to  prevent  hasty  legislation, 
and  to  give  stability  to  the  government 
by  its  being  known  what  the  laws  were, 
thus  avoiding  the  evils  which  result  when 
the}-  are  frequently  changed.  It  is  often 
preferable  to  have  permanent  laws, 
though  not  the  best  that  could  be  framed, 
than  those  which  would  be  better  if  there 
were  no  stability.  There  is  only  one 
Being,  however,  whose  laws  can  be  safely 
unchanging — and  that  is  God,  for  his  laws 
are  formed  with  a  full  knowledge  of  all 
the  relations  of  things,  and  of  their  bear- 
ing on  all  future  circumstances  and  times. 
It  serves  to  confirm  the  statement  here 
made  respecting  the  ancient  custom  in 
Media  and  Persia,  that  the  same  idea  of 
the  inviolability  of  the  royal  word  has 

j  remained,  in  a  mitigated  form,  to  modern 
times.  A  remarkable  example  c;f  this  is 
related  by   Sir   John    Malcolm,   ^,f   Aga 

I  Mahommed  Khan,  the  last  but  one  of  the 
Persian  kings.  After  alluding  to  the 
present  case,  and  that  in  Esther,  he  ob- 

I  serves.  "  The  character  of  the  i)ower  of 
the  king  of  Persia  has  undergone  no 
change.     The  late  king,  Aga  Mahommed 

!  Khan,  when  encamped  near  Shiraz,  said 

!  that  he  would  not  move  till  the  snow  was 
off  the  mountains  in  the  vicinity  of  his 
camp.  The  season  proved  severe,  and 
the  snow  remained  longer  than  was  ex- 
pected ;  the  army  began  to  suffer  distress 
and  sickness,  but  the  king  said  while  the 
snow  remained  upon  the  mountain,  ho 
would  not  move  ;  and  his  word  was  as 

i  law,  and  could  not  bo  broken.  A  multi- 
tude of  labourers  were  collected  and  sent 
to  remove  the  snow ;  their  efforts,  and  a 
few  fine  daj-s,  cleared  the  mountains,  and 
Aga  Mohammed  Khan  marched."  His- 
tory of  Persia  i.  268,  quoted  in  the  Pict. 
Bible,  ui  loc. 

10.  HoiD  when  Daniel  Joietv  that  the 
icriting  was  signed.  Probably  there  was 
some  proclamation  maxle  in  regard  to  the 

j  decree.  ^  He  icent  into  his  house.  That 
is,  he  went  in  in  his  usu.al  manner.  Ho 
made  no  change  in  his  habits  on  acccunt 


B.  C.  637.] 


CHAPTER    VI. 


269 


toward  =>  Jerusalem, he  kneeled  upon 'his  knees  three  times  fca  day,  and 


» 1  Ki.  8.  44,  48.    Ps.  5.  7.    Jo.  2.  4. 

of  tho  decree,  ^f  .4'"^  '"*  toindoics  heinrj 
open  in  his  chamher.  Open  in  tho  usual 
manner.  It  does  not  mean  that  he  took 
pains  to  open  them  for  the  purpose  of  os- 
tentation, or  to  show  that  ho  disregarded 
tho  decree,  but  that  he  took  no  care  to 
?lose  them  with  any  view  to  avoid  the  con- 
sequences. In  tho  warm  climate  of  Bab}-- 
lon,  the  windows  probably  were  commonly 
open.  Houses  among  the  Jews  in  later 
times,  if  not  in  the  time  of  tho  exile, 
were  usually  constructed  with  an  upper 
chamber — vntptMv — which  was  a  room  not 
in  common  use,  but  employed  as  a  guest 
chamber,  where  thcj-  received  company 
and  held  feasts,  and  where  at  other  times 
they  retired  for  prayer  and  meditation. 
See  Notes  on  Matt.  ix.  2.  Those  'upper 
rooms'  are  often  the  most  pleasant  and 
airy  part  of  the  house.  Dr.  Robinson 
(Researches,  vol.  iii.  p.417,)  describing  the 
house  of  the  American  consular-agent  in 
Sillon,  says,  "  His  house  was  a  large  one, 
built  upon  the  eastern  wall  of  the  city; 
the  rooms  were  spacious,  and  furnished 
with  more  appearance  of  wealth,  than 
any  I  saw  in  the  country.  An  upper 
parlour  with  many  windows,  on  the  roof 
of  the  proper  house,  resembled  a  summer 
palace ;  and  commanded  a  delightful 
view  of  the  country  towards  the  East, 
full  of  trees,  and  gardens,  and  country 
houses,  quite  to  the  foot  of  tho  moun- 
tains." ^  Toward  Jerusalem.  It  is  not 
improbable  that  the  windows  were  open 
on  each  side  of  tho  chamber,  but  this  is 
particularly  mentioned  because  he  turned 
his  face  toward  Jerusalem  when  he  praj-ed. 
This  was  natural  to  an  exile  Hebrew  in 
prayer,  because  the  temple  of  God  had 
stood  at  Jerusalem,  and  that  was  tho 
place  where  he  abode  by  a  visible  symbol. 
It  is  probable  that  the  Jews  in  their  own 
country  always  in  their  praj'crs  turned  the 
ftice  toward  Jerusalem,  and  it  was  anti- 
cipated when  the  temple  was  dedicated, 
that  this  would  be  the  case  in  whatever 
lands  they  might  be.  Thus  in  the  prayer 
of  Solomon,  at  tho  dedication,  he  says, 
"  If  thy  people  go  out  to  battle  against 
their  enemy,  whithersoever  thou  shalt 
send  them,  and  shall  pray  unto  the  Lord 
toward  the  city  which  thou  hast  chosen, 
and  toward  the  house  which  I  have  built 
31  thy  name,"  «fcc.  1  Kings  riii.  ii.  And 
2.3* 


b  Ps.  55. 17.  ver.  13.    Ac.  2. 15.  3. 1.    10.  9. 


again  (vs.  46 — 49),  "If  they  sin  against 
thee,  and  thou  bo  angry  with  them,  and 
deliver  them  to  the  enemy,  so  that  they 
carry  them  away  captives  unto  the  land 
of  the  enemy,  far  or  near;  if  they  shall 
bethink  themselves  in  the  land  whither 
they  were  carried  captives,  and  repent — 
and  pray  unto  thee  toward  their  land 
which  thou  gavest  unto  their  fathers,  the 
city  which  thou  hast  chosen,  and  tho 
house  which  I  have  built  for  thy  name, 
then  hear  thou  their  praj'er,"  <te.  Comp. 
vs.  33,  35,  38.  So  in  Ps.  v.  7:  "As  for 
me,  I  will  come  into  thy  house  in  the 
multitude  of  thy  mercy,  and  in  thy  fear 
will  I  worship  toward  thy  holy  temple." 
So  Jonah  ii.  4  :  "Then  I  said,  I  am  cast 
out  of  thy  sight;  yet  I  will  look  again 
toward  thy  holy  temple."  So  in  the  first 
book  of  Esdras  (Apocrj'pha),  iv.  58  :  "  Now 
when  this  young  man  was  gone  forth,  he 
lifted  up  his  face  to  heaven,  toward  Jeru- 
salem, and  praised  tho  king  of  heaven." 
Comp.  Intro.  §  2.  v.  Daniel,  therefore, 
in  turning  his  face  toward  Jerusalem 
when  he  prayed,  was  acting  in  accord- 
ance with  what  Solomon  had  anticipated 
as  proper  in  just  such  a  supposed  case, 
and  with  the  prevailing  habit  of  his  peo- 
ple when  abroad.  This  was  not,  indeed, 
particularly  prescribed  as  a  duty,  but  it 
was  recognized  as  proper  ;  and  it  was 
not  only  in  accordance  with  the  instinc- 
tive feelings  of  love  to  his  country  and 
the  temple,  but  a  foundation  was  laid  for 
this  in  the  fact  that  Jerusalem  was  re- 
garded as  the  peculiar  dwelling-place  of 
God  on  earth.  In  the  Koran  it  is  en- 
joined as  a  duty  on  .ill  Mussulmen,  in 
whatever  part  of  the  earth  they  may  be, 
to  turn  their  faces  towards  the  Caaba  at 
Mecca  when  they  pray:  "The  foolish 
men  will  say,  What  hath  turned  them 
from  their  keblah  toward  which  they 
formerly  prayed  ?  Say,  Unto  God  be- 
longcth  the  East  and  the  West;  he 
directeth  whom  he  pleaseth  in  the  right 
way.  Thus  have  wo  placed  you,  0  Ara.- 
bians,  an  intermediate  nation,  that  y 
may  be  witnesses  against  the  rest  oi 
mankind,  that  tho  apostle  may  bo  a  wit- 
ness against  you.  We  appointed  the 
keblah  towards  which  thou  didst  formerly 
pray,  only  that  we  might  know  him  who 
I  followeth    the    apostle,   from    him   that 


270 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  537. 


prayed,    and   gave    thanks  ^^  before 
his  God,  as  he  did  aforetime. 

11  Then  these  men  assembled, 
and  found  Daniel  praying  and  mak- 
ing supplication  before  his  God. 

12  Then   they  came  ^  near,  and 

turneth  back  on  his  heels :  though  this 
change  seem  a  great  matter,  unless  unto 
those  whom  God  hath  directed.  But  God 
will  not  render  your  faith  of  none  effect; 
fur  God  is  gracious  and  merciful  unto 
man.  AVe  have  seen  thee  turn  about  thy 
face  towards  heaven  with  uncertainty, 
but  wo  will  cause  thee  to  .turn  thyself 
towards  a  keblah  that  will  please  thee. 
Turn,  therefore,  thy  face  towards  the  holy 
temple  of  Mecca;  and  wherever  ye  be, 
turn  your  faces  towards  that  place." 
Sale's  Koran,  ch.  ii.  Wherever  Mus- 
sulmen  are,  therefore,  they  turn  their 
faces  towards  the  temple  of  Mecca  when 
they  pray.  Daniel  complied  with  what 
was  probably  the  general  custom  of  his 
countrymen,  and  what  was  natural  in  his 
case,  for  there  was,  in  the  nature  of  the 
case,  a  reason  why  he  should  turn  his 
face  towards  the  place  where  God  had 
been  accustomed  to  manifest  himself.  It 
served  to  keep  up  in  his  mind  the  re- 
membrance of  his  beloved  country,  and 
in  his  case  could  be  attended  with  no 
evil.  As  all  visible  symbols  of  the  divine 
Being  are  now,  however,  withdrawn  from 
any  particular  place  on  the  earth,  there 
is  no  propriety  in  imitating  his  example, 
and  when  we  pray  it  is  wholly  immaterial 
in  what  direction  the  face  is  turned. 
^  He  kneeled  upon  his  knees  three  times  a 
day.  In  accordance  doubtless  with  his 
usual  custom.  The  amount  of  the  state- 
ment is,  that  he  did  not  vary  his  habit 
on  account  of  the  command.  He,  evi- 
dently, neither  assumed  a  posture  of 
ostentation,  nor  did  he  abstain  from  what 
ho  was  accustomed  to  do.  To  have  de- 
parted from  his  usual  habit  in  any  way 
would  have  been  a  yielding  of  principle 
in  the  case.  It  is  not  mentioned  at  what 
time  in  the  day  Daniel  thus  kneeled  and 
prayed,  but  we  may  presume  that  it  was 
evening,  and  morning,  and  noon.  Thus 
the  Psalmist  says  :  "Evening,  and  morn- 
ing, and  at  noon,  will  I  pray,  and  cry 
aloud;  and  ho  shall  hear  my  voice." 
Ps.  Iv.  17.  No  one  can  doubt  the  pro- 
priety of  thus  praying  to  God;  and  it 
Would  bo  well  for  all  thus  to  call  upon 


spake  before  the  king  concerning 
the  king's  decree  ;  Hast  thou  not 
signed  a  decree,  that  every  man  that 
shall  ask  a  pdiiion  of  any  God  or 
man  within  thirty  days,  save  of  thee, 
<:  Ph.  4.  6.  b  c.  3.  8. 


their  God.  *^  As  he  did  aforetime.  "With- 
out making  any  change.  He  neither  in- 
creased nor  diminished  the  number  of 
times  each  day  in  which  he  called  upon 
God ;  nor  did  he  make  any  change  in  the 
manner  of  doing  it.  He  did  not  seek 
ostentatiously  to  show  that  he  was  a  wor- 
shipper of  God,  nor  was  ho  deterred  by 
the  fear  of  punishment  from  doing  as  he 
had  been  accustomed  to  do.  If  it  should 
be  said  that  Daniel's  habit  of  worship 
was  ostentatious ;  that  his  praying  with 
his  windows  open  was  contrary  to  the 
true  spirit  of  retiring  devotion,  and  espe- 
cially contrary  to  the  spirit  required  of 
worshippers  in  the  New  Testament  where 
the  Saviour  commands  us  when  we  pray 
to  'enter  into  the  closet,  and  to  shut  the 
door,'  (Matt.  vi.  6,)  it  may  be  replied, 
(1)  that  there  is  no  evidence  that  Daniel 
did  this  for  the  purpose  of  ostentation, 
and  the  supposition  that  he  did  it  for  that 
purpose  is  contrary  to  all  that  we  know 
of  his  character;  (2)  as  we  have  seen, 
this  was  the  customary  place  for  praj-er, 
and  the  manner  of  the  prayer  was  that 
which  was  usual ;  (3)  the  chamber,  or 
upper  part  of  the  house  was  in  fact  the 
most  retired  part,  and  was  a  place  where 
one  would  be  least  likely  to  be  heard  or 
seen ;  and  (4)  there  is  no  evidence  that 
it  would  not  have  been  quite  private  and 
unobserved  if  these  men  had  not  gone  to 
his  house  and  listened  for  the  very  pur- 
pose of  detecting  him  at  his  devotions. 
No  one  could  well  guard  against  such  a 
purpose. 

11.  Then  these  men  assemlled,  &c. 
Evidently  with  a  design  of  finding  him 
at  his  devotions. 

12.  Then  they  came  near.  That  is,  they 
came  near  the  king.  They  had  detected 
Daniel,  as  they  expected  and  desired  to 
do,  in  a  palpable  violation  of  the  law, 
and  they  lost  no  time  in  apprising  the 
king  of  it,  and  in  reminding  him  of  the 
law  which  he  had  established.     Informers 

I  are  not  apt  to  lose  time.  ^  The  king  an- 
1  sicered  and  said,  The  thing  is  true,  &c. 
I  It  is  undeniable,  whatever  may  be  the 
j  consequences.      There   is  no   reason    to 


B.  C.  537.] 


CHAPTER    VI. 


271 


0  king,  shall  be  cast  into  the  den 
of  lions  ?  The  king  answered  and 
said,  The  thing  is  true,  according 
to  the  law  of  the  Modes  and  Per- 
sians, which  altereth  » not. 

13  Then  answered  they,  and  said 
Defore  the  king,  That  Daniel,  which 


'  ver.  S. 


be.  u.  13. 


suppose  that  be  as  yet  had  any  suspicion 
of  their  design  in  asking  this  question. 
It  is  not  improbable  that  ho  apprehended 
there  had  been  some  violation  of  the  law, 
but  it  does  not  appear  that  his  suspicions 
rested  on  Daniel. 

13.  Then  answered  they — That  Daniel, 
which  is  of  the  children  of  the  captiviti/ 
of  Judah.  Who  is  one  of  the  captive 
Jews.  There  was  art  in  thus  referring 
to  Daniel,  instead  of  mentioning  him 
as  sustaining  an  exalted  office.  It  would 
serve  to  aggravate  his  guilt  to  remind 
the  king  that  one  who  was  in  fact  a 
foreigner,  and  a  captive,  had  thus  dis- 
regarded his  solemn  commandment.  If 
he  had  been  mentioned  as  the  prime 
minister,  there  was  at  least  a  possibility 
that  the  king  would  be  less  disposed  to 
deal  with  him  according  to  the  letter  of 
the  statute  than  if  ho  were  mentioned  as 
a  captive  Jew.  •[  Rtgardeth  not  thee,  &q. 
Shows  open  disregard  and  contempt  for 
the  royal  authority  by  making  a  petition 
to  his  God  three  times  a  day. 

14.  Then  the  Icing,  when  he  heard  these 
words,  teas  sore  displeased  with  himself. 
That  is,  for  having  consented  to  such  a 
decree  without  deliberation,  or  with  so 
much  haste — or  for  having  consented  to 
it  at  all.  It  is  remarkable  that  it  is  not 
said  that  he  was  displeased  with  them  for 
having  proposed  it;  but  it  is  clear  that 
he  saw  that  the  guilt  was  his  own  for 
having  given  his  assent  to  it,  and  that 
he  had  acted  foolishly.  There  is  no  evi- 
dence as  yet  that  he  saw  that  the  de- 
cree had  been  proposed  for  the  purpose 
of  securing  the  degradation  and  ruin  of 
Daniel — though  he  ultimately  perceived 
it  (ver.  2-1);  or  if  he  did  perceive  it, 
there  was  no  way  of  preventing  the  con- 
sequences from  coming  on  Daniel — and 
that  was  the  point  that  now  engrossed  his 
attention.  He  was  doubtless  displeased 
with  himself,  (1)  because  he  saw  that  he  j 
had  done  wrong  in  framing  such  a  decree, 
which  interfered  with  what  had  been  tole- 
rated—-the  free  exercise  of  religion  by  his  j 


I"  is  of  the  children  of  the  captivity 
of  Judah,  regardeth  '=not  thee,  0 
king,  nor  the  decree  that  thou  hast 
signed,  but  makcth  his  petition 
three  times  a  day. 

1-i  Then  the  king,  when  he  heard 
these  words,   was    sore    displeased 

c  c.  3. 12.    Ac.  5.  29. 


subjects;  (2)  because  he  now  saw  that  it 
was  foolish,  and  unworthy  of  a  king,  thus 
to  assent  to  a  law  for  which  there  was  no 
good  reason,  and  the  consequences  of 
which  he  had  not  foreseen,  and  (3)  be- 
cause he  now  saw  that  he  had  involved 
the  first  officer  of  the  realm,  and  a  man 
of  unsullied  character  in  ruin,  unless  some 
way  could  be  devised  by  which  the  con- 
sequences of  the  statute  could  be  averted. 
It  is  no  uncommon  thing  for  men  to  be 
displeased  tcith  themselves  when  they  ex- 
perience the  unexpected  consequences  of 
their  follies  and  their  sins.  An  instance 
strongly  resembling  that  here  stated,  in 
its  main  features,  occurred  at  a  later  pe- 
riod in  the  history  of  Persia — an  instance 
showing  how  the  innocent  may  be  in- 
volved in  a  general  law,  and  how  much 
perplexityand  regret  maybe  causedby  the 
enactment  of  such  a  law.  It  occurred  in 
Persia,  in  the  persecution  of  Christians, 
A.  D.  344.  "  An  edict  appeared,  which 
commanded  that  all  Christians  should  be 
thrown  into  chains  and  executed.  Many 
belonging  to  every  rank  died  as  martyrs. 
Among  these  was  a  eunuch  of  the  palace, 
named  Azades,  a  man  greatly  prized  by 
the  king.  So  much  was  the  latter  affected 
by  his  death,  that  he  commanded  that 
the  punishment  of  death  should  be  in- 
flicted from  thenceforth  only  on  the  lead- 
ers of  the  Christian  sect;  that  is,  only  on 
persons  of  the  clerical  order."  Neauder's 
Church  History,  Torrey's  Translation,  voU 
ii.  p.  110.  ^  And  set  his  heart  on  Daniel 
to  deliver  him.  In  what  way  he  sought 
to  deliver  him  is  not  said.  It  would  seem 
probable  from  the  representation  in  the 
following  verse,  that  it  was  by  an  inquiry 
whether  the  statute  might  not  properly 
be  changed  or  cancelled,  or  whether  the 
penalty  might  not  be  commuted — for  it 
is  said  that  his  counsellors  urged  as  a 
reason  for  the  strict  infliction  of  the  pun- 
ishment the  absolute  unchangeableness 
of  the  statute.  Perhaps  he  inquired 
whether  a  precedent  might  not  be  found 
for  the  abrogation  of  a  law  enacted  bj  a 


272 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  537 


'with  himself,  and  set  Ma  heart  on 
Daniel  to  deliver  him :  and  he  la- 

^  Ma.  6.  26. 


king  by  the  same  authority  that  enacted 
it;  or  whether  it  did  not  come  within 
the  king's  prerogative  to  change  it;  or 
whether  the  punishment  might  not  be 
commuted  without  injury;  or  whether 
the  evidence  of  the  guilt  was  perfectly 
clear;  oi  whether  he  might  not  be  par- 
doned without  anything  being  done  to 
maintain  the  honour  of  the  law.  This  is 
one  of  the  most  remarkable  instances  on 
record  of  the  case  of  a  monarch  seeking 
to  deliver  a  subject  from  punishment  when 
the  monarch  had  absolute  power,  and  is 
a  striking  illustration  of  the  difficulties 
which  often  arise  in  the  administration 
of  justice,  where  the  law  is  absolute,  and 
where  justice  seems  to  demand  the  inflic- 
tion of  the  penaltj',  and  yet  where  there 
are  strong  reasons  why  the  penalty  should 
not  be  inflicted;  that  is,  why  an  offender 
should  be  pardoned.  And  yet,  there  is 
no  improbability  in  this  statement  about 
the  perplexity  of  the  king,  for  (1)  there 
were  strong  reasons,  easily  conceivable, 
why  the  penalty  should  7wt  be  inflicted 
in  the  case,  because  (a)  the  law  had  been 
evidently  devised  by  the  crafty  enemies 
of  Daniel  to  secure  just  such  a  result; 
(b)  Daniel  had  been  guilty  of  no  crime — 
no  moral  wrong,  but  had  done  only  that 
which  should  commend  him  more  to  fa- 
vour and  confidence;  (c)  his  character 
was  every  way  upright  and  pure  :  (d)  the 
very  worship  which  he  had  been  detected 
in  had  been  up  to  that  period  allowed, 
and  there  was  no  reason  why  it  should 
now  be  punished,  and  (e)  the  infliction  of 
the  penalty,  though  strictly  according  to 
the  letter  of  the  law,  would  be  manifestly 
a  violation  of  justice  and  equity  ;  or,  in 
other  words,  it  was  every  way  desirable 
that  it  should  not  be  inflicted.  Yet 
(2)  there  was  great  difficulty  in  pardon- 
ing him  who  had  offended,  for  (a)  the 
law  was  absolute  in  the  case ;  {!>)  the  evi- 
dence was  clear  that  Daniel  had  done 
what  the  law  forbade;  (c)  the  law  of  the 
realm  prohibited  any  change  ;  ((/)  the  char- 
acter and  government  of  the  king  were 
involved  in  the  case.  If  he  interposed 
and  saved  Daniel,  and  thus  sufi'ered  the 
law  to  be  violated  with  impunity,  the  re- 
sult would  be  that  there  would  be  a  want 
«f  stability  in  his  administration,  and  any 
c'^her  subject  could  hope  that  ho  might 


boured  till  the  going  down  of  the 
sun  to  deliver  them. 


violate  the  law  with  the  same  impunity. 
Justice,  and  the  honour  of  the  govern- 
ment, therefore,  seemed  to  demand  that 
the  law  should  be  enforced,  and  the  pen- 
alty inflicted.  (3)  It  may  be  added,  that 
cases  of  this  kind  are  frequently  occur- 
ring in  the  administration  of  law — cases 
where  there  is  a  conflict  between  justice 
and  mercy,  and  where  one  must  be  sacri- 
ficed to  the  other.  There  are  numerous 
instances  in  which  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  the  law  has  been  violated,  and  yet  in 
which  strong  reasons  exist  why  the  of- 
fender should  be  pardoned.  Yet  there 
are  great  difiiculties  in  the  whole  subject 
of  pardon,  and  there  are  more  embar- 
rassments in  regard  to  this  than  anything 
else  pertaining  to  the  administration  of 
the  laws.  If  an  offence  is  jiever  pardoned, 
then  the  government  is  stern  and  inex- 
orable, and  its  administration  violates 
some  of  the  finest  and  most  tender  feelings 
of  our  nature — for  there  are  cases  when 
all  the  benevolent  feelings  of  our  nature 
demand  that  there  should  be  the  remission 
of  a  penalty — cases,  modified  by  youth,  or 
age,  or  sex,  or  temptation,  or  previous 
character,  or  former  service  rendered  to 
one's  countrj'.  And  yet,  pardon  in  any 
instance  always  does  just  so  much  to 
weaken  the  strong  arm  of  the  law.  It  is 
a  proclamation  that  in  some  cases  crime 
may  be  committed  with  impunity.  If 
often  exercised,  law  loses  its  force,  and 
men  are  little  deterred  from  crime  by  fear 
of  it.  If  it  were  always  exercised,  and  a 
proclamation  were  sent  forth  that  anrj  one 
who  committed  an  offence  might  be  par- 
doned, the  authority  of  government  would 
be  at  an  end.  Those,  therefore,  who 
are  entrusted  with  the  administration 
of  the  laws  are  often  substantially  in 
the  same  perplexity  in  which  Darius  was 
in  respect  to  Danicl^all  whose  fetliwja 
incline  them  to  mercy,  and  who  3'et  see  no 
way  in  which  it  can  be  exercised  con- 
sistently with  the  administration  of  jus- 
tice and  the  prevention  of  crime.  ^  And 
he  laboured.  lie  sought  to  devise  somt 
way  in  which  it  might  be  done.  ^  Till  the 
f/oinf/  down  of  the  sun.  Houbigant  under- 
stands this,  "  Till  the  sun  arose;"  but  the 
common  rendering  is  probably  the  correct 
one.  Why  that  hour  is  mentioned,  is  not 
known.     It  would  seem  from  the  follow- 


B.  C.  5S7.] 


CHAPTER  VI 


273 


15  Then  these  men  assembled 
unto  the  kins;,  and  said  unto  the 
king,  Know,  0  king,  that  the  hiw 
of  the  Medcs  and  Persians  is,  That 
no  decree  nor  statute  which  the  king 
establisbeth  may  be  changed. 
«Je.  23. 14.    Ac.  25. 11. 


ing  verse  that  the  king  was  pressed  by 
his  counsellors  to  carry  the  decree  into 
execution,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  king 
taw  that  the  case  was  a  perfectly  clear 
one,  and  that  nothing  could  be  hoped  for 
from  dt'l:i\'.  The  law  was  clear,  and  it 
was  equall}'  clear  that  it  had  been  vio- 
lated. There  was  no  way  then  but  lo 
suflFer  it  to  take  its  course. 

15.  Then  these  men  asseinb/ed  unto  the 
king.  The  Chaldee  here  is  the  same  as 
in  ver.  G,  'they  came  turaultuously.' 
They  wore  earnest  that  the  law  should 
be  executed,  and  they  probably  appre-  ' 
hendcd  that  if  the  king  were  allowed  to 
dwell  upon  it,  the  firmness  of  his  own 
mind  would  give  way,  and  that  he  would 
release  Daniel.  Perhaps  they  dreaded  | 
the  efifect  of  the  compunctious  visitings  j 
which  he  might  have  during  the  silence  i 
of  the  night,  and  they,  therefore,  came 
tumultuously  to  hasten  his  decision. 
%Know,  0  kin;/,  that  the  /air,  &c.  That 
is  a  settled  matter  about  which  there  can 
be  no  debate  or  difference  of  opinion.  It 
would  seem  that  this  was  a  point  so  well 
settled  that  no  question  could  be  raised 
in  regard  to  it,  and,  to  their  minds,  it 
was  equally  clear  that  if  this  were  so,  it 
■was  necessary  that  the  sentence  should 
be  executed  without  delay. 

16.  Then  the  ]ci»ij  eomiitanded,  &c.  Sec 
Notes  on  ver.  7.  Some  recent  discoveries 
nmong  the  ruins  of  Babylon  have  shown 
that  the  mode  of  punishment  by  throwing 
offenders  against  the  laws  to  lions  was 
actually  practised  there,  and  these  dis- 
coveries may  be  classed  among  the  nu- 
merous instances  in  which  modern  inves- 
tigations have  tended  to  confirm  the  state- 
ments in  the  Bible.  Three  interesting 
figures  illustrating  this  fact  may  be  seen  in 
the  Pictorial  Bible,  vol.  iii.  p."  2.32.  The 
first  of  those  figures,  from  a  block  of  stone, 
was  found  at  Babylon  near  the  great 
mass  of  ruin  that  is  supposed  to  mark 
the  site  of  the  grand  western  palace.  It 
represents  a  lion  standing  over  the  body 
uf  a  prostrate  man,  extended  on  a  pedes- 
lal  which  measures  nine  feet  in   length 


IG  Then  the  king  commanded, 
and  they  brought  ^Dauiel,  and  cast 
him  into  the  den  of  lions.  Now  the 
king  spake,  and  said  unto  Daniel, 
Thy  God,  whom  thou  servest  con- 
tinually, he  will  deliver  ''thee. 
bPs.  37.  39,40;  c.  3. 15, 17. 

by  three  in  breadth.  The  head  has  been 
lately  knocked  off;  but  when  Mr.  Rich 
saw  it,  the  statue  was  in  a  perfect  state, 
and  he  remarks  that  ''  the  mouth  had  a 
circular  aperture  into  which  a  man  might 
introduce  his  fist."  The  second  is  from 
an  engraved  gem,  dug  from  the  ruins  of 
Babylon  by  Captain  Mignan.  It  exhibits 
a  man  standing  on  two  sphinxes,  and  en- 
gaged with  two  fierce  animals,  possibly 
intended  fur  lions.  The  third  is  from  a 
block  of  white  marble  found  near  the 
tomb  of  Daniel  at  Susa,  and  thus  de- 
scribed by  Sir  Robert  Ker  Porter  in  his 
'  Travels,'  (vol.  ii.  p.  416).  "  It  does  not 
exceed  ten  inches  in  width  and  depth, 
measures  twenty  in  length,  and  is  hollow 
within,  as  if  to  receive  some  deposit. 
Three  of  its  sides  are  cut  in  has  relief, 
two  of  them  with  similar  representations 
of  a  man  apparently  naked,  except  a 
sash  round  his  waist,  and  a  sort  of  cap 
on  his  head.  His  hands  are  bound  be- 
hind him.  The  corner  of  the  stone 
forms  the  neck  of  the  figure,  so  that  its 
head  forms  one  of  its  ends.  Two  lions 
ill  sitting  postures  appear  on  either  side 
at  the  top,  each  having  a  paw  on  the 
head  of  the  man."  See  Pict.  Bible  in 
Inc.  ^  Now  the  king  spake  and  said  nnto 
Daniel,  Thtf  God,  &c.  What  is  here  stated 
is  in  accordance  with  what  is  said  in 
ver.  1-t,  that  the  king  sought  earnestly 
to  deliver  Daniel  from  the  punishment. 
He  had  entire  confidence  in  him,  and  he 
expressed  that  to  the  last.  As  to  the 
question  of  prohalii/iti/  whether  Darius, 
a  heathen,  would  attempt  to  comfort 
Daniel  with  the  hope  that  he  would  be  de- 
livered, and  would  express  the  belief  that 
this  would  be  done  by  that  God  whom  he 
served,  and  in  whoso  cause  he  was  about 
to  be  exposed  to  peril,  it  may  be  remarked 
(1)  That  it  was  a  common  thing  among 
the  heathen  to  believe  in  the  interposi- 
tion of  the  gods  in  favour  of  the  righte- 
ous, and  particularly  in  favour  of  their 
worshippers.  Sec  llomor,  pass  in.  Hence 
it  was  that  they  called  on  them;  that 
they   committed   themselves  to  them  in 


274 


DANIEL. 


[B.C.  537. 


17  And  a  stoue  *^vas  brought, 
and  laid  upon  the  mouth  of  the  den  ; 
and  the  king  sealed  ^  it  with  his  own 
signet,  and  with  the  signet  of  his 
lords,  that  the  purpose  might  not 
be  changed  concerning;  Daniel. 


battle  and  in  peril ;  that  they  sought 
their  aid  by  sacrifices  and  by  prayers. 
No  one  can  doubt  that  such  a  belief  pre- 
vailed, and  that  the  mind  of  Darius,  in 
accordance  with  the  prevalent  custom, 
might  be  under  its  influence.  (2)  Darius, 
undoubtedly,  in  accordance  with  the  pre- 
vailing belief,  regarded  the  God  whom 
Daniel  worshipped  as  a  god,  though  not 
as  exclusively  the  true  God.  He  had  the 
esamc  kind  of  confidence  in  him  that  he 
had  in  an}'  god  worshipped  by  foreigners — 
and  probably  regarded  him  as  the  tute- 
lary divinity  of  the  land  of  Palestine, 
and  of  the  Hebrew  people.  As  he  might 
consistently  express  this  belief  in  refer- 
ence to  any  foreign  divinity,  there  is  no 
improbability  that  he  would  in  reference  to 
the  God  worshipped  by  Daniel.  (3)  He 
had  the  utmost  confidence  both  in  the  in- 
tegrity and  the  piety  of  Daniel;  and  as 
he  believed  that  the  gods  interposed  in 
human  affairs,  and  as  he  saw  in  Daniel 
an  eminent  instance  of  devotedness  to 
his  God,  he  did  not  doubt  that  in  such  a 
ease  it  might  be  hoped  that  ho  would 
save  him. 

17.  And  a  stone  tras  brour/Jit,  and  laid 
upon  (he  mouth  of  the  den.  Probably  a 
largo  flat  stone  sufficient  to  cover  the 
mouth  of  the  cave,  and  so  heavy  that 
Daniel  could  not  remove  it  from  within 
and  escape.  It  was  usual  then,  as  it  is 
now,  to  close  up  the  entrance  to  sepul- 
chres with  a  large  stone.  See  John 
xi.  38;  Matt,  xxvii.  60.  It  wodW  be 
natural  to  endeavour  to  secure  this 
vault  or  den  in  the  same  wa}- — on  the 
srie  hand  so  that  Daniel  could  not  escape 
from  within,  and  on  the  other  so  that 
none  of  his  friends  could  come  and  rescue 
him  from  without.  ^  And  the  kinrj  sealed 
it  with  his  oicn  sitjuet.  With  his  own  seal. 
That  is,  he  affixed  to  the  stone,  probably 
b}'  means  of  clay  or  wax,  his  seal,  in  such 
a  way,  that  it  could  not  be  removed  by 
any  one  without  breaking  it,  and  conse- 
quently without  the  perpetration  of  a 
crime  of  the  highest  kind — for  no  greater 
iffcnce  could  be  committed  against  his 


18  1[  Then  the  king  went  to  his 
palace,  and  passed  the  night  fast- 
ing: neither  were  'instruments  of 
music  brought  before  him ;  and  his 
sleep  went  from  him. 
a  La.  3.  53.  t  Mat.  27.  66.  '  or,  table. 


authority,  than  thus  to  break  his  seal, 
and  there  could  be  no  greater  security 
that  the  stono  would  not  be  removed. 
On  the  manner  of  sealing  a  stone  in  such 
circumstances,  comp.  Notes  on  Matt. 
xxvii.  60.  ^  And  icith  the  siijnct  of  hia 
lords.  That  it  might  have  all  the  security 
which  there  could  be.  Perhaps  this  was 
at  the  suggestion  of  his  lords,  and  the 
design,  on  their  part  may  have  been  so 
to  guard  the  den  that  the  king  should 
not  release  Daniel.  ^  That  the  purjwsc 
miijht  not  be  changed  concerninrj  Daniel. 
By  the  king.  Probably  they  feared  that 
if  there  was  not  this  security,  the  king 
might  release  him ;  but  they  presumed 
that  he  would  not  violate  the  seal  of  the 
great  ofiicers  of  the  realm.  It  would  seem 
that  some  sort  of  concurrence  between  the 
king  and  his  nobles  was  required  in  mak- 
ing and  executing  the  laws. 

18.  Then  the  king  went  to  his  palace, 
and  2'>n8sed  the  night  fasting.  Daniel  was 
probably  cast  into  the  den  soon  after  the 
going  down  of  the  sun,  ver.  14.  It  was  not 
unusual  to  have  supjiers  ihen  late  at  night 
I  as  it  is  now  in  many  places.  The  great 
'.  anxiety  of  the  king,  however,  on  account 
I  of  what  had  occurred,  prevented  him 
from  participating  in  the  usual  evening 
meal.  As  to  the  j^i'^lahiliti/  of  what  is 
here  afiirmed,  no  one  can  have  any  doubt 
who  credits  the  previous  statements.  In 
[  the  consciousness  of  wrong  done  to  a 
worthy  officer  of  the  government;  in 
the  deep  anxiety  which  he  had  to  de- 
liver him;  in  the  excitement  which  must 
have  existed  against  the  cunning  and 
wi  'ked  authors  of  the  plot  to  deceive  the 
king  and  to  ruin  Daniel ;  and  in  his  soli- 
citude and  hope  that  after  all  Daniel 
might  escape,  there  is  a  satisfactory  rea- 
son for  the  facts  stated  that  ho  had  no 
desire  for  food  ;  that  instruments  of  music 
were  not  brought  before  him;  and  that 
he  passed  a  sleepless  night.  1'  Neither 
I  icere  instruments  if  music  brought  before 
\  him.  It  was  usual  among  Ihe  ancients 
to  have  music  at  their  meals.  This  cus- 
I  torn  prevailed   among   the    Greeks   anj 


B.  C.  537.J 


CHAPTER   \  I. 


279 


19  Then  the  king  arose  very  early  [  vant  of  the  living  God,  is  thy  God, 
in  the  morning,  and  went  in  haste  j  whom  thou  servcst  continually,  able 
unto  the  den  of  lions.  |  to  deliver  thee  from  the  lions? 

20  And  when  he  came  to  the  den,  j  21  Then  said  Daniel  unto  the 
he  cried   with   a  lamentable   A'oice   king,  0  king,  live  forever. 


unto  Daniel :  and  the  king  spake 
and  said  to  Daniel,  0  Daniel,  ser- 

Romans,  ami  doubtless  was  common  in 
the  Oriental  world.  It  should  be  ob- 
jorved,  however,  that  there  is  consider- 
tblo  variety  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
ivorii  bore  rendered  instruments  of  music — 
\)rr.  The  margin  is  table.  The  Latin 
Vulgate,  'He  slept  supperless,  neither 
was  food  brought  before  him.'  The  Greek 
renders  it  food — t^Eo-^iara,  So  the  Syriac. 
Berthoklt  and  Gesenius  render  it  concu- 
bines, and  Saadias  dancing  girls.  Any 
of  these  significations  would  be  appro- 
priate ;  but  it  is  impossible  to  determine 
which  is  the  most  correct.  The  word 
does  not  occur  elsewhere  in  the  Scrip- 
lures. 

19.  Then  the  king  arose  very  early  in 
the  morning,  Ac.  No  one  can  doubt  the 
orohability  of  what  is  here  said,  if  the 
previous  account  bo  true.  His  deep 
anxiety;  his  wakeful  night;  the  re- 
morse which  he  endured,  and  his  hope 
that  Daniel  would  bo  after  all  preserved, 
all  would  prompt  to  an  early  visit  to  the 
place  of  his  confinement,  and  to  his  earn- 
estness in  ascertaining  whether  he  were 
Btill  alive. 

20.  He  cried  with  a  lamentable  voice. 
A  voice  full  of  anxious  solicitude.  Liter- 
ally 'a  voice  of  grief.'  Such  a  cry  would 
b5  natural  on  such  an  occasion.  *[  0 
Daniel,  servant  of  the  living  God.  The 
God  who  has  life;  who  imparts  life;  and 
who  can  preserve  life.  This  was  the 
(ippellation,  probably,  which  he  had  heard 
Daniel  use  in  regard  to  God,  and  it  is 
one  which  he  would  naturally  employ  on 
such  an  occasion  as  this,  feeling  that  the  [ 
question  of  life  was  entirely  in  his  hands,  j 
^  Whom  thou  servest  continually.  At  all 
times,  and  in  all  circumstances :  as  a  { 
captive  in  a  distant  land;  iu  places  of 
honour  and  power;  when  surrounded  by 
the  great  who  worship  other  gods ;  and 
when  threatened  with  death  for  your  de- 
votion to  the  service  of  G<3d.  This  had 
been  the  character  of  Daniel,  and  it  was 
jatural  to  refer  to  it  now. 

21.  Then  said  Daniel  unto  the  king,  0 


22  My  God  hath  sent  his  » angel, 


king,  live  forever.  The  common  form  of 
salutation  in  addressing  the  king.  See 
Notes  on  ch.  ii.  4.  There  might  be  more 
than  mere  form  in  this,  for  Daniel  may 
have  been  aware  of  the  true  source  of  the 
calamities  that  had  come  upon  him,  and 
of  the  innocence  of  the  king  in  the  mat- 
ter ;  and  ho  doubtless  recalled  the  interest 
which  the  king  had  shown  in  him  when 
about  to  be  cast  into  the  den  of  lions,  and 
his  expression  of  confidence  that  his  God 
would  be  able  to  deliver  him  (ver.  16), 
and  he  could  not  but  have  been  favour- 
ably impressed  by  the  solicitude  which 
the  monarch  now  showed  for  his  wel- 
fare in  thus  early  visiting  him,  and  by 
his  anxiety  to  know  whether  he  were 
still  alive. 

22.  3/y  God  hath  sent  his  angel.  It 
was  common  among  the  Hebrews  to  attri- 
bute any  remarkable  preservation  from 
danger  to  the  intervention  of  an  angel 
sent  from  God,  and  no  one  can  demon- 
strate that  it  did  not  occur  as  they  sup- 
posed. There  is  no  more  absurdity  in 
supposing  that  God  employs  an  an- 
gelic being  to  defend  his  people,  or  to 
impart  blessings  to  them,  than  there 
is  in  supposing  that  he  employs  one 
human  being  to  render  important  aid, 
and  to  convey  important  blessings  to  an- 
other. As  a  matter  of  fact,  few  of  the 
favours  which  God  bestows  upon  men 
are  conveyed  to  them  directly  from  him- 
self, but  they  are  mostly  imparted  by 
the  instrumentality  of  others.  So  it  is  in 
the  blessings  of  liberty,  in  deliverance 
from  bondage,  in  the  provision  made  for 
our  wants,  in  the  favour  bestowed  on  u» 
ic  infancy  and  childhood.  As  this  prin- 
ciple prevails  everywhere  on  the  earth, 
it  is  not  absurd  to  suppose  that  it  may 
prevail  elsewhere,  and  that  on  important 
occasions,  and  on  instances  above  the 
rank  of  human  intervention,  God  ma.j 
employ  the  instrumentality  of  higher 
beings  to  defend  his  people  in  trouble, 
and  rescue  them  from  danger.  Comp. 
Ps.  xxxiv.  7,  xci.  11 ;  Dan.  ix.  21 ;  Matt 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  587, 


and  hath  shut  the  » lions'  mouths, 
that  they  have  not  hurt  me  :  foras- 
much as  before  him  innocency  '^■\vas 
found  in  me  ;  and  also  before  thee, 
0  king,  have  I  done  no  hurt. 

23  Then  was  the  king  exceeding 
glad  for  him,  and  commanded  that 

» lie.  11.  33.  1^  Ps.  18.  20,  2i ;  26.  6. 

xviii.  10;  Luke  xvi.  22;  Ileb.  i.  U. 
Daniel  does  not  say  vrhetlior  the  angel 
was  visible  or  not,  but  it  is  rather  to  bo 
presumed  that  he  was,  as  in  this  way  it 
would  bo  more  certainly  known  to  him 
that  ho  owed  his  deliverance  to  the  inter- 
vention of  an  angel,  and  as  this  would  be 
to  him  a  manifest  token  of  the  favour 
and  protection  of  God.  ^  And  hath  shut 
the  liuns'  mouthf.  It  is  clear  that  Daniel 
supposed  that  this  was  accomplished  by 
a  miracle;  and  this  is  the  only  satisfac- 
tory solution  of  what  had  occurred. 
There  is,  moreover,  no  more  objection  to 
the  supposition  that  this  was  a  miracle 
than  there  is  to  any  miracle  whatever, 
for  {n)  there  is  no  more  fitting  occasion 
for  the  divine  intervention  than  when  a 
good  man  is  in  danger,  and  (6)  the  object 
to  be  accomplished  on  the  mind  of  the 
king,  and  through  him  on  the  minds  of 
the  people  at  large,  was  worthy  of  such 
an  interposition.  The  design  was  evi- 
dently to  impress  the  mind  of  the  mon- 
arch with  the  belief  of  the  existence  of  the 
true  God,  and  to  furnish  in  the  court  of 
Babylon  proof  that  should  be  convincing 
that  he  is  the  only  God.  *\  Foras}nucli 
as  before  him  innocency  was  found  in  me. 

(1)  Absolute  innocency  in  reference  to 
the  question  of  guilt  on  the  point  in  \>hich 
ho  had  been  condemned — he  having  done 
only    that   which    God    approved;    and 

(2)  general  integrity  and  uprightness  of 
character.  We  need  not  suppose  that 
Daniel  claimed  to  be  absolutely  perfect 
(comp.  eh.  ix.),  but  we  may  suppose  that 
he  means  to  say  that  God  saw  that 
ho  was  what  he  professed  to  be,  and 
that  his  life  was  such  as  he  approved. 
^  And  also  before  thee,  0  Icing,  have  I 
done  no  hurt.  That  is,  he  had  in  no  man- 
ner violated  his  duty  to  the  king;  he 
had  done  nothing  that  tended  to  over- 
throw his  government,  or  to  spread  dis- 
affection among  his  subjects. 

23.  Then  the  king  icas  exceeding  glad 
(or  him.     Oa   account  rf  Daniel.     That 


they  should  take  Daniel  up  out  of 
the  den.  So  Daniel  Avas  takan  up 
out  of  the  den,  and  no  manner  of 
hurt  vvas  found  upon  him,  because 
he  believed  in  liis  God. 

24^  And  the  king  commanded,  and 
they  brought  those  men  <=  ■which  had 

c  Dc.  19. 19. 

is,  he  was  rejoiced  for  the  sake  of  Daniel 
that  he  had  received  no  hurt,  and  that 
he  might  be  restored  to  his  place,  and 
be  useful  again  in  the  government. 

24.  And  the  Icing  commanded,  and  they 
brought  those  men  ichich  had  accused  Dan- 
iel, &c.  It  would  seem  probable  that  the 
king  had  been  aware  of  their  wicked  de- 
signs against  Daniel,  and  had  been  satis- 
fied that  the  whole  was  the  result  of  a 
conspiracy',  but  he  felt  himself  under  .-t 
necessity  of  allowing  the  law  to  take  its 
course  on  him  whom  he  believed  to  be 
really  innocent.  That  had  been  done.  All 
that  the  law  could  he  construed  as  requiring 
had  been  accomplished.  It  could  not  be 
pretended  that  the  law  required  that  any 
other  punishment  should  be  inflicted  oa 
Daniel,  and  the  way  was  now  clear  to 
deal  with  the  authors  of  the  malicious 
plot  as  they  deserved.  No  one  can  rea- 
sonably doubt  the  probability  of  what  is 
here  said  in  regard  to  the  conspirators 
against  Daniel.  The  king  had  arbitrary 
power.  He  was  convinced  of  their  guilt. 
His  wrath  had  been  with  difficulty  re- 
strained when  ho  understood  the  nature 
of  the  plot  against  Daniel.  Nothing, 
therefore,  was  more  natural  than  that  he 
should  subject  the  guilty  to  the  same  pun- 
ishment which  they  had  sought  to  bring 
upon  the  innocent;  nothing  more  natural 
than  that  a  proud  despot  who  saw  that, 
by  the  force  of  a  law  which  he  could  not 
control,  he  had  been  made  a  tool  in  sub- 
jecting the  highest  officer  of  the  realm, 
and  the  best  man  in  it,  to  peril  of 
death,  that  he  should,  without  any  delay, 
wreak  his  vengeance  on  those  who  had 
thus  made  use  of  him  to  gratify  their  own 
malignant  passions.  II  Them,  and  their 
children,  and  their  icires.  This  was  in 
accordance  with  Oriental  notions  of  jus- 
tice, and  was  often  done.  It  is  said  ex- 
presfJy  by  Ammianus  Marcellinus  (23.  6, 
81,)  to  have  been  a  custom  among  tho 
Persians :  '  The   laws  among  them  [th« 


B.  C.  537.] 


CHAPTER    VI. 


277 


accused  Daniel,  and  they  cast  them 
into  the  den  of  lions,  them,  their 
»  cliildren,  and  their  -wives  ;  and  the 
lions  had  the  •>  mastery  of  them,  and 
brake  all  their  bones  in  pieces  or 
ever  they  came  at  the  bottom  of  the 
den. 

«De.  24. 16;  2Ki.  1-1.6;  Es.  9.  10.      i^Ps.  54.5. 


Persians]  are  formidable:  among  which 
those  which  are  enacted  against  the  un- 
grateful and  deserters,  and  similar  abom- 
inable crimes,  surpass  others  in  crueU}', 
by  whicli,  on  account  of  the  guilt  of  one, 
all  the  kindred  perish' — per  quas  ob  n*xam 
unius  oninis  propinquitas  perit.  So  Cur- 
tius  says  of  the  Macedonians  :  '  It  is  en- 
ncted  by  law  that  the  kindred  of  those 
who  conspire  against  the  king  shall  be 
put  to  death  with  them.'  Instances  of 
this  kind  of  punishment  are  found  among 
the  Hebrews  (Josh.  vii.  24:  2  Sam.  x.xi.  5, 
seq.),  though  it  was  forbidden  by  the  law 
of  Moses,  in  judicial  transactions.  Dent. 
x.viv.  16.  Comp.  also  Ezek.  xviii.  JIauer, 
1)1  loc.  In  regard  to  this  transaction,  we 
may  observe  C«)  that  nothing  is  more  pro- 
bable than  that  this  would  occur,  since, 
as  appears  from  the  above  quotations,  it 
was  often  done,  and  there  was  nothing  in 
the  character  of  Darius  that  would  prevent 
it,  though  it  seams  to  us  to  be  so  unjust. 
(6)  It  was  the  act  of  a  heathen  monarch, 
and  it  is  not  necessary  in  order  to  defend 
the  Scripture  narrative,  to  vindicate  the 
justice  of  the  transaction.  The  record 
may  be  true,  though  the  thing  itself  was 
evil  and  wrong,  (c)  Yet  the  same  thing 
substantially  occurs  in  the  course  of  Pro- 
vidence, or  the  administration  of  justice 
now.  Nothing  is  more  common  than  that 
the  wife  and  children  of  a  guilty  man 
should  suffer  on  account  of  the  sin  of  the 
husband  and  father.  Who  can  recount 
the  woes  that  come  upon  a  family 
through  the  intemperance  of  a  father? 
And  in  cases  where  a  man  is  condemned 
for  crime,  the  consequences  are  not  con- 
fined to  himself.  In  shame,  and  mortifi- 
cation, and  disgrace;  in  the  anguish  ex- 
perienced when  he  dies  on  a  gibbet;  in 
the  sad  remembrance  of  that  disgraceful 
death;  in  the  loss  of  one  who  might  have 
provided  for  their  wants,  and  been  their 
p»:.tector  and  counsellor,  the  wife  and 
children  alicat/s  suffer;  and,  though  this 
took  another  form  in  ancient  times,  and 
2i 


25  TfThcn  <=  king  Darius  wrote  unto 
•all  people,  nations,  and  lan^^uages, 
that  dAvcll  in  all  the  earth  ;  Peace  be 
multiplied  unto  you, 

26  I  make  a  decree.  That  in  every 
dominion  of  my  kingdom  men  <•  trem- 
ble and  fear  before  the  God  of  Dan- 

<=c.  4. 1.  <'Ps.  99.1. 


when  adopted  as  a  principle  of  punish- 
ment, is  not  in  accordance  with  our  sense 
of  justice  in  administering  laws,  yet  it  is 
a  principle  which  pervades  the  world — 
for  the  effects  of  crime  cannot  and  do  not 
terminate  on  the  guilty  individual  him- 
self. ^  And  the  lions  had  the  mastery  of 
them.  As  the  divine  restraint  furnished 
for  the  protection  of  Daniel  was  with- 
drawn, they  acted  out  their  proper  nature. 
^f  And  brake  all  their  bones  in  i^ieces  or 
eier,  <tc.  Literally,  '  they  did  not  come  to 
the  bottom  of  the  den  until  the  lions  had 
the  mastery  of  them,  and  brake  all  their 
bones.'  They  seized  upon  them  as  they 
fell,  and  destroyed  them. 

25.  Then  hiwj  Darius  wrote  nnto  all 
people,  &c.  Comp.  Notes  on  chs.  ii.  47, 
iii.  29,  iv.  1.  If  there  is  a  probability  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  would  make  such  a  pro- 
clamation as  he  did,  there  is  no  less  pro- 
bability that  the  same  thing  would  be 
done  by  Darius.  Indeed,  it  is  manifest 
on  the  face  of  the  whole  narrative  that 
one  great  design  of  all  that  occurred  was 
to  proclaim  the  knowledge  of  the  true 
God,  and  to  secure  his  recognition.  That 
object  was  worthy  of  the  divine  interposi- 
tion, and  the  facts  in  the  case  show  that 
God  has  porcer  to  induce  princes  and 
rulers  to  recognize  his  existence  and  per- 
fections, and  his  government  over  the 
earth. 

26.  I  make  a  decree.  Comp.  ch.  iii.  29. 
^  That  in  every  dominion  of  my  kingdom. 
Every  department,  or  province.  The  en- 
tiro  kingdom  or  empire  was  made  up  of 
several  kingdoms,  as  Media,  Persia,  Ba- 
bylonia, &c.  The  meaning  is,  that  ho 
wished  the  God  of  Daniel  to  be  honoured 
and  reverenced  throughout  the  whole  em- 
pire. *yj/ei!  tremble  and  fear  before  the 
God  of  Daniel.  That  they  honour  and 
reverence  him  as  God.  There  is  no  cer- 
tain evidence  that  he  meant  that  he  should 
be  honoured  as  the  only  God,  but  the  pro- 
bability is,  that  he  meant  that  he  should 
be  recognized  as  a  God  of  great  power  and 


278 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  537 


iel :  for  =■  he  is  the  living  God,  and 
steadfast  for  ever,  and  his  kingdom 
^  that  -which  shall  not  be  destroyed, 
and  his  dominion  shall  be  even  unto 
the  end. 

27  He  c  delivereth  and  rescueth, 
and  he  worketh  <■  signs  and  wonders 

^c.  4.  34.        ''c.2.  44.        cps.18.  60;  32.  7. 

glory,  and  as  worthy  of  universal  rever- 
ence. How  far  this  heathen  monarch 
might  still  regard  the  other  deities  wor- 
shipped in  the  empire  as  gods,  or  how  far 
his  own  heart  might  be  disposed  to  hon- 
our the  God  of  Daniel,  there  are  no  means 
of  ascertaining.  It  was  much,  however, 
that  so  great  a  monarch  should  be  led  to 
make  a  proclamation  acknowledging  the 
God  of  Daniel  as  having  a  real  existence, 
and  as  entitled  to  universal  reverence. 
^  For  he  is  the  Ih'iiirj  God.  An  appella- 
tion often  given  to  God  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  probably  learned  by  Darius  from 
Daniel.  It  is  not,  however,  absolutely 
certain  that  Darius  would  attach  all  the 
ideas  to  these  phrases  which  Daniel  did, 
or  which  we  would.  The  attributes  here 
ascribed  to  God  are  correct,  and  the  views 
expressed  are  far  beyond  any  that  pre- 
vailed among  the  iieathen,  but  still  it 
would  not  be  proper  to  suppose  that  Da- 
rius certainly  had  all  the  views  of  God 
which  these  words  would  convey  to  us  now. 
^  And  steadfast  forever.  That  is,  he  is 
alwaj's  the  same.  He  ever  lives;  he  has 
power  over  all ;  his  kingdom  is  on  an  im- 
movable foundation.  He  is  not,  in  his 
government,  to  cease  to  exist,  and  to  be 
succeeded  by  another  who  shall  occupy 
his  throne.  If  Atid  his  kingdom  that  which 
shall  not  he  destroyed,  &c.  See  Notes  on 
ch.  iv.  3,  34.  The  similarity  between  the 
language  used  here,  and  that  employed 
by  Nebuchadnezzar,  shows  that  it  was 
probably  derived  from  the  same  source. 
It  is  to  be  presumed  that  both  monarchs 
expressed  the  views  which  they  had 
learned  from  Daniel. 

27.  He  delivereth  and  rescueth.  As  in 
the  case  of  Daniel.  This  attribute  would 
of  course  be  prominent  in  the  view  of  Da- 
rius, since  so  remarkable  an  instance  of  his 
power  had  been  recently  manifested  in 
rescuing  Daniel.  ^  And  he  worheth  signs 
««oJ    tBonders,   Ac.      Performs    miracles 


in  heaven  and  in  earth,  vrho  hath 
delivered  Daniel  from  the  <=  power 
of  the  lions. 

28  So  this  Daniel  prospered  in 
the  reign  of  Darius,  and  in  the  reign 
of  f  Cyrus  the  Persian. 


d  c.  4. 3. 
(c.l.  21. 


Ezr.  1.  1, 


far  above  all  human  jiower.  If  he  had 
done  it  on  earth  in  the  case  of  Daniel,  it 
was  fair  to  infer  that  he  did  it  also  in 
heaven.  Comp.  Notes  ch  iv.  2,  3.  ^  The 
2}oicer  of  the  lions.  Marg.,  hand.  The 
hand  is  the  instrument  of  power.  The 
word  j:)a»i  would  express  the  idea  here, 
and  would  accord  with  the  meaning,  as 
it  is  usually  with  the  paw  that  the  lion 
strikes  down  his  prey  before  he  de- 
vours it. 

28.  So  this  Daniel  prospered  in  the 
reign  of  Darius.  That  is,  to  the  end  of 
his  reign.  It  is  fairly  implied  here  that 
he  was  restored  to  his  honours.  ^  And 
in  the  reign  of  Cyrus  the  Persian.  Cyrus 
the  Great,  the  nephew  and  successor  of 
Darius.  For  an  account  of  Cyrus,  sec 
Notes  on  Isa.  Ixi.  2.  How  long  during  tho 
reign  of  Cyrus,  Daniel  'prospered' or  lived 
is  not  said.  During  a  jjart  of  the  reign  of 
Darius  or  Cj-axares,  he  was  occupied 
busily  in  securing  by  his  influence  the 
welfare  of  his  own  people,  and  making 
arrangements  for  their  return  to  their 
land ;  and  his  high  post  in  the  nation  to 
which,  under  divine  Providence,  he  had 
doubtless  been  raised  for  this  purpose,  en- 
abled him  to  render  essential  and  invalu- 
able service  at  the  court.  In  the  third 
year  of  Cyrus,  we  are  informed  (ch. 
X — xii.),  he  had  a  series  of  visions  re- 
specting the  future  history  and  sufferings 
of  his  nation  to  the  period  of  their  true 
redemption  through  the  Messiah,  as  also  a 
consolatory  direction  to  himself  to  proceed 
calmly  and  peaceably  to  the  end  of  his 
days,  and  then  await  patiently  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead,  ch.  xii.  12,  13.  From 
that  period  the  accounts  respecting  him 
are  vague,  confused,  and  even  strange, 
and  little  or  nothing  is  known  of  the  timo 
or  circumstances  of  the  death.  (Comp. 
Intro.  §1.) 

From  this  chapter  we  may  derive  the 
following  instructive  practical 


B.C.  537.]  CHAPTER    VI  279 


(1)  We  hare  an  instance  of  what  often  occurs  in  the  world — of  envy  on  account  ( '  the  excel- 
lency of  otlicrs,  and  of  tlie  honours  which  they  obtain  by  tlieir  talent  and  their  "Worth,  vs.  1 4. 

Nothing  is  more  frequent  than  such  envy,  and  nothing  more  common,  as  a  consequence,  than 
a  determination  to  degrade  those  who  are  the  subjects  of  it.  linvy  always  seeks  in  some  way 
to  humble  and  mortify  those  who  are  distinguislied.  It  is  the  pain,  mortification,  chagrin,  and 
regret  which  we  have  at  their  superior  excellence  or  prosperity,  and  this  prompts  us  to  endea- 
vour to  bring  them  down  to  our  own  level,  or  below  it;  to  calumniate  their  characters;  to  bin- 
•ler  their  prosperity ;  to  embarrass  them  in  their  plans;  to  take  up  and  circulate  rumours  to 
Cheir  disadvantage;  to  magnify  their  faults,  or  to  fasten  upon  them  the  suspicion  of  crime.  In 
the  instance  before  us,  we  see  the  effect  in  a  most  guilty  conspiracy  again.st  a  man  of  incorrupti- 
ble character ;  a  man  full  in  the  confidence  of  his  sovereign ;  a  man  eminently  the  friend  of 
virtue  and  of  God. 

Envy  will  merit,  as  its  shade,  pursue ; 

But  like  a  shadow,  proves  the  substance  true. 

[Pope,  Essay  on  Criticism. 

Base  envy  withers  at  another's  joy, 

And  hates  that  excellence  it  cannot  reach. 

[Thompson,  Seasons. 

Be  thou  as  chaste  as  ice,  as  pure  as  snow, 

Thou  shalt  not  escape  calumny.  [^Shakespeare. 

That  thou  art  blamed  shalt  not  he  thy  defect ; 

For  slander's  mark  was  ever  j'et  the  fair ; 

So  thou  be  good,  slander  doth  yet  approve 

Thy  worth  the  greater.  [Shalccspearc. 

(2)  TTc  have  in  this  chapter  (vs.  4 — 9),  a  striking  illustration  of  the  nature  and  the  evils  of  a 
covspfracy  to  ruin  others.  The  plan  here  was  deliberately  formed  to  ruin  Daniel— the  best  man 
in  the  realm — a  man  against  whom  no  charge  of  guilt  could  be  alleged,  who  had  done  the  con- 
spirators no  wrong ;  who  had  rendered  himself  in  no  way  amenable  to  the  laws.  A  '  conspiracy' 
is  a  combination  of  men  for  evil  purposes ;  an  agreement  between  two  or  more  persons  to  commit 
some  crime  in  concert,  usually  treason,  or  an  insurrection  against  a  government  or  state.  In 
this  case,  it  was  a  plot  growing  wholly  out  of  envy  or  jealousy ;  a  concerted  agreement  to  ruin  a 
good  man,  where  no  wrong  had  been  done  or  could  be  pretended,  and  no  crime  had  been  committed. 
The  essential  things  in  this  conspiracy,  as  in  all  other  cases  of  con.spiracy,  were  two:  (n)  thattho 
purpose  was  evil ;  and  (b)  that  it  was  to  be  accomplished  by  the  combined  influences  of  numbers. 
The  means  on  which  they  relied,  or  the  grounds  of  calculation  on  the  success  of  their  plot,  were 
the  following  :  (1)  that  they  could  calculate  on  the  unwavering  integrity  of  Daniel — on  his  firm 
and  faithful  adherence  to  the  principles  of  his  religion  in  all  circumstances,  and  in  all  times  of 
temptation  and  trial ;  and  (2)  that  they  could  induce  the  king  to  pass  a  law,  irrepealable  from  the 
nature  of  the  case,  which  Daniel  would  be  certain  to  violate,  and  to  the  penalty  of  which,  there- 
fore, he  would  be  certainly  exposed.  Now  in  this  purpose  there  was  every  element  of  iniquity, 
and  the  grossest  conceivable  wrong.  There  were  combined  all  the  evils  of  envy  and  malice ; 
of  perverting  and  abusing  their  influence  over  the  king;  of  secresy  in  taking  advantage  of  one 
who  did  not  su.spect  any  such  design;  and  of  involving  the  king  himself  in  the  necessity  of 
exposing  the  best  man  in  his  realm,  and  the  highest  officer  of  state,  to  the  certain  danger  of 
death.  The  result,  however,  showed,  as  is  often  the  case,  that  the  evil  recoiled  on  them.selves, 
and  that  the  very  calamity  overwhelmed  them  and  their  families  which  they  had  designed  for 
another. 

(.3)  AVe  have  here  a  striking  instance  of  what  often  occurs,  and  what  should  always  occur, 
among  the  friends  of  religion,  that  '  no  occasion  can  be  found  against  them  except  in  regard  to 
the  law  of  their  God' — on  the  score  of  their  religion,  ver.  5.  Daniel  was  known  to  be  upright. 
Ilis  character  for  Integrity  was  above  suspicion.  It  was  certain  that  there  was  no  hope  of  bring- 
ing any  charge  against  him  that  would  lie,  for  any  want  of  uprightness  or  honesty ;  for  any 
failure  in  the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  his  office ;  for  any  malver.'sation  in  administering  the 
affairs  of  the  government;  for  any  embezzlement  of  the  public  funds,  or  for  any  act  of  injustice 
towards  his  fellow-men.  It  was  certain  that  his  character  was  irreproachable  on  all  these 
points;  and  it  was  equally  certain  that  he  did  and  would  maintain  unwavering  fidelity  in  the 
duties  of  religion.  Whatever  consequences  might  follow  from  it,  it  was  clear  that  they  could 
calculate  on  his  maintaining  with  faithfulness  the  duties  of  piety.  Whatever  plot,  therefore, 
could  be  formed  against  him  on  the  basis  either  of  his  moral  integrity,  or  his  piety,  it  was  cer- 
tain would  be  successful.  But  there  was  no  hope  in  regard  to  the  former,  for  no  law  could  have 
been  carried  prohibiting  his  doing  what  was  right  on  the  subject  of  morals.  The  only  hope, 
therefore,  was  in  respect  to  his  religion  ;  and  the  main  idea  in  their  plot — the  thing  which  con 
Ftituted  the  basis  of  their  plan  was,  t/iat  it  was  certain  Vial  Daniel  wnuld  mainiain  hisfLdelity  to 
his  God  irrcspectii-c  of  any  cotisequcnccs  whatever.  This  certainty  ought  to  exist  in  regard  to 
every  good  man;  every  man  professing  religion.  Ilis  character  ought  to  be  so  well-understood ; 
bis  piety  ought  to  be  so  firm,  unwavering,  and  consistent,  that  it  could  be  calculated  on  just  as 
tertainly  as  we  calculate  on  the  stability  of  tho  laws  of  nature,  that  he  will  be  found  faithful 


280  DANIEL.  [B.C.  537 

^o  bis  religious  duties  and  obligations.  There  are  such  men,  and  the  character  of  every  mai 
should  he  sucli.  Then  iudoed  we  should  know  what  to  depend  on  in  the  world;  then  religion 
would  l.e  respected  as  it  should  be. 

(4)  We  niiiy  learn  what  is  our  duty  when  we  arc  opposed  in  the  exercise  of  cur  religion,  oz 
when  we  .^re  in  any  way  threatened  with  loss  of  office,  or  of  property,  on  account  of  our  religion, 
Ter.  10.  We  arc  to  persevere  in  Vie  dise/iarge  of  our  relvjious  unties,  whatever  may  ie  the  contie- 
qucnces.  So  far  as  the  example  of  Daniel  gcc,  this  would  involve  two  things :  (a)  not  to  ."^werve 
from  the  faithful  performance  of  duty,  or  not  to  be  deterred  from  it ;  and  (0)  not  to  change  our 
course  from  any  desire  of  display.  These  two  things  were  manifested  by  Daniel.  He  kept 
steadily  on  his  way.  He  did  not  abridge  the  number  of  times  of  his  daily  devotion;  nor,  as  far 
as  appears,  did  he  change  the  form  or  the  length.  He  did  not  cease  to  pray  in  an  audible  voice  ; 
he  did  not  give  up  prayer  in  the  day  time,  and  pray  only  at  night;  he  did  not  even  close  hia 
windows  ;  he  did  not  take  any  precautions  to  pray  wiicn  none  were  near ;  he  did  not  withdraw 
iuto  an  inner  chamber.  At  llio  same  time,  he  made  no  changes  in  his  devotion  for  the  sake  of 
ostentation.  He  did  not  open  his  windows  before  closed;  he  did  not  go  into  the  street;  he  did 
not  call  around  him  bis  friends  or  foes  to  witness  his  devotions  ;  he  did  not,  as  far  as  appears, 
either  elevate  his  voice,  or  prolong  his  prayer.s,  in  order  to  attract  attention,  or  to  invite  perse- 
cution. In  all  this  he  manifested  the  true  spirit  of  religion,  and  set  an  example  to  men  to  be 
followed  in  all  ages.  Not  by  the  loss  of  fame  or  money ;  by  the  dread  of  persecution,  or  con- 
tempt of  death ;  by  the  threatenings  of  law  or  the  fear  of  shame,  are  we  to  be  deterred  from 
the  proper  and  the  usual  performance  of  our  religious  dxities;  nor  by  a  desire  to  provoke  per.=e- 
cution,  and  to  win  the  crown  of  martyrdom,  and  to  elicit  applause,  and  to  have  our  names  bla- 
zoned abroad,  are  we  to  multiply  our  religious  acts,  or  make  an  ostentatious  display  of  them, 
when  we  are  threatened,  or  when  we  know  that  our  conduct  w  ill  excite  opposition.  Via  are  to 
ascertain  w  hat  is  right  and  proper  ;  and  then  we  are  modestly  and  firmly  to  do  it,  no  matter 
what  may  be  the  consequences.     Comp.  Matt.  v.  16;  Acts  iv.  1(J — 20,  v.  '29. 

(o)\Ve  have,  in  the  case  of  Darius,  an  instance  of  what  often  happens,  the  regret  and  anguish 
which  the  mind  experiences  in  consequence  of  a  rash  act,  when  it  cannot  be  repaired,  ver.  14. 
The  act  of  Darius  in  making  the  decree  was  eminently  a  rash  one.  It  was  done  without 
deliberation,  at  the  suggestion  of  others,  and  probably  xmder  the  influence  of  some  very  im- 
proper feeling — the  desire  of  being  esteemed  as  a  god.  But  it  had  consequences  which  he  did 
not  foresee — consequences  which,  if  he  had  foreseen  them,  would  doubtless  have  prevented  his 
giving  a  sanction  to  this  iiiiquitous  law.  The  state  of  mind  which  he  experienced  when  he  saw 
how  tiie  act  involved  the  best  officer  in  his  government,  and  the  best  man  in  his  realm,  was  just 
what  might  have  been  expected,  and  is  an  illustration  of  what  often  occurs.  It  was  too  late 
now  to  prevent  the  effects  of  the  act ;  and  liis  mind  was  overwhelmed  with  remorse  and  sorrow. 
He  blamed  himself  for  his  folly ;  and  he  sought  in  vain  for  some  way  to  turn  aside  the  conse- 
quences which  he  now  deplored.  Such  instances  often  occur:  (a)  many  of  our  acts  are  rash. 
They  are  performed  without  deliberation ;  under  the  influence  of  improper  passions ;  at  the 
suggestion  of  others  who  would  be  thought  to  be  our  friends;  and  without  any  clear  view  of 
the  consequences,  or  any  concern  as  to  what  the  result  maybe.  (h)As  an  effect,  they  often 
have  consequences  which  we  did  not  anticipate,  and  which  would  have  deterred  us  in  each  in- 
stance had  we  foreseen  them,  (c)  They  often  produce  regret  and  anguish  when  too  late,  and 
when  we  cannot  prevent  the  evil.  The  train  of  evils  which  has  been  commenced  it  is  now  too 
late  to  retard  or  prevent,  and  they  now  inevitably  come  upon  us.  Vic  can  only  stand  and  weep 
over  the  efl'ects  of  our  rashness  and  folly  ;  and  must  now  feel  that  if  the  evil  is  averted,  it  will 
be  by  the  interposition  of  <iod  alone. 

(C)  Me  have  in  this  chapter  an  affecting  instance  of  the  evils  which  often  arise  in  a  human 
government  from  the  want  of  something  like  an  atonement,  ver.  14,  seq.  As  has  been  remarked 
in  the  Notes,  cases  often  arise  w  hen  it  is  desirable  that  pardon  should  be  extended  to  the  vio- 
lators of  law.  See  Notes  on  ver.  14.  In  such  cases,  some  such  arrangement  as  that  of  an  atone- 
ment, by  which  the  honour  of  the  law  might  bo  maintained,  and  at  the  same  time  the  merciful 
feelings  of  an  executive  might  be  indulged,  and  the  benevolent  wishes  of  a  community  grati- 
fied, would  remove  difficulties  which  are  now  felt  in  every  human  administration.  The 
difficulties  in  the  case,  and  the  advantage  which  would  arise  from  an  atonement,  may  be  scea 
by  a  brief  reference  to  the  circumstances  of  the  case  before  us:  (u)the  law  was  inexorable. 
It  demanded  punishment,  as  all  law  does — for  no  law  in  itself  makes  any  provision  for  par- 
don. If  it  did  it  would  be  a  burlesque  on  all  legislation.  Law  denounces  penalty;  it  dees 
not  pardon,  or  show  mercy.  It  has  become  necessary  indeed  to  lodge  a  pardoning  power  with 
some  man  intrusted  with  the  administration  of  the  laws,  but  the  pardon  is  not  extended  by  the 
law  itself.  (t)The  anxiety  of  the  king  in  the  case  is  an  illustration  of  what  often  occurs  in  the 
administration  of  Law,  for,  as  above  observed,  there  are  cases  where,  on  many  accounts,  it  would 
Ecem  to  be  desirable  that  the  penalty  of  the  law  should  not  be  inflicted.  Such  a  case  was  that 
of  Dr.  Dodd,  in  London,  in  which  a  petition,  signed  by  thirty  thousand  names,  was  presented, 
praying  for  the  remission  of  the  penalty  of  death.  Such  a  case  was  that  of  Major  Andre,  when 
AVashington  shed  tears  at  the  necessity  of  signing  the  death-warrant  of  so  young  and  .so  accom« 
plished  an  officer.  Such  cases  often  occur,  in  which  there  is  the  deepest  anxiety  in  the  besom 
of  an  executive  to  see  if  there  is  not  some  way  by  which  the  infliction  of  the  penalty  of  the  law 
may  be  avoided,  (c)  Yet  there  was  in  the  case  of  Darius  no  possibility  of  a  change,  and  this 
too  is  an  illustration  of  what  often  occurs.  The  law  was  inexorable.  It  could  not  be  repealed. 
Bo  now  there  are  instances  where  the  penalty  of  law  cannot  be  avoided  consistently  with 
Uie  welfare  of  a  community.    I'unishment  must  be  inflicted,  or  all  law  b«<come  a  nullity.    An 


B.C.  537.]  CHAPTER    VI.  281 

instance  of  this  kind  Tvas  that  of  Dr.  Dodd.  lla  was  convicted  of  forgery.  So  important  haclTt 
been  deemed  for  tlie  welfare  of  a  commercial  community  that  t/tat  crime  should  be  prcvcntmi 
that  no  one  ever  had  been  pardoned  for  it,  and  it  was  felt  that  no  one  ."ihould  be.  Such  nn  in- 
stance was  that  of  .Major  .^ndre.  The  .'safety  and  welfare  of  the  whole  army,  and  the  success  of 
the  cause,  seemed  to  demand  that  the  offence  should  not  jj;o  unpunished.  Yet  (c)  there  arc 
diificulties  in  extendin;j;  pardon  to  the  Kuilty  :  (1)  if  it  is  done  at  all,  it  always  docs  so  much  to 
weaken  the  stroni;  arm  of  the  law,  and  if  nfien  done,  it  m.akes  law  a  nullity,  and  (J)  if  it  is7(fi'cr 
done,  the  law  seems  stern  and  inexorable,  and  the  finer  feeliuffs  of  our  nature,  and  the  benevo- 
lent wishes  of  the  community,  are  disregarded,  (rf)  These  difficulties  are  obviated  by  an  atone- 
ment. The  things  which  are  accomplished  in  the  atonement  made  under  the  divine  govern- 
ment, we  think,  .so  far  as  this  point  is  concerned,  and  which  distinguishes  pardon  in  the  divine 
administration  from  pardon  everywhere  else,  relieving  it  from  all  the  embarrassments  felt  in 
other  governments,  are  the  following:  (1)  there  is  the  utmost  respect  paid  to  the  laiv.  It  is 
honoured  (()  in  the  personal  obedience  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  {li)\n  the  sacrifice  which  he  made 
on  the  cross  to  maintain  its  dignity,  and  to  show  that  it  could  not  bo  violated  with  impunity — 
more  lionoured  by  far  than  it  would  bo  by  the  perfect  obedience  of  man  himself,  or  by  its  pen- 
alty being  borne  by  the  sinner.  (2)  Pardon  can  be  offered  to  any  extent,  or  to  any  number  of 
offenders.  All  the  feelings  of  benevolence  and  mercy  can  be  indulged  and  gratified  in  the  most 
free  manner — for  now  that  an  atonement  is  made,  all  proper  honour  h.as  been  .shown  to  the 
law  and  to  the  claims  of  justice,  and  no  interest  will  suffer  though  the  most  ample  proclama- 
tion of  pardon  is  issued.  There  is  but  one  government  in  the  univer.se  that  can  safely  to  itself 
make  an  unlimited  offer  of  pardon — that  is  the  government  of  God.  There  is  not  a  human 
government  that  could  safely  make  the  offer  wliich  we  meet  everywhere  in  the  IJible,  that 
all  offences  may  be  forgiven ;  that  all  violators  of  Law  may  be  pardoned.  If  such  a  procla- 
mation were  made,  there  is  no  earthly  administration  that  could  hope  to  stand;  no  com- 
munity which  would  not  soon  become  the  prey  of  lawless  plunder  and  robbery.  The  reason, 
and  the  sole  reason,  why  it  can  be  done  in  the  divine  administration  is,  that  an  atonement  has 
been  made  by  which  the  honour  of  the  law  has  been  .secured,  and  by  which  it  is  .shown  that, 
while  pardon  is  extended  to  all,  the  law  is  to  be  honoured,  and  can  never  be  violated  with 
impunity.  (3)  The  plan  of  pardon  by  the  atonement  secures  the  observance  of  the  law  on 
the  part  of  those  who  are  pardoned.  This  can  never  be  depended  on  when  an  offender  against 
human  laws  is  pardoned,  and  when  a  convict  is  discharged  from  the  penitentiary.  So  far  as 
the  effect  of  punishment,  or  any  influence  from  the  act  of  pardon  is  concerned,  there  is  no 
security  that  the  pardoned  convict  will  not,  as  his  first  .act,  force  a  dwelling  or  commit  murder. 
But  in  the  case  of  all  who  are  pardoned  through  the  atonement,  it  is  made  certain  that  they 
will  be  obedient  to  the  laws  of  iiod,  and  that  their  lives  will  bo  changed  from  sin  to  holiness — 
from  disobedience  to  obedience.  This  has  been  secured  by  incorporating  into  the  plan  a  provi- 
sion by  which  the  heart  shall  be  changed  before  pardon  is  granted  :  not  as  the  ground  or  reason 
of  pardon,  but  as  es.sential  to  it.  The  heart  of  the  sinner  is  renewed  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  he 
becomes  in  fact  obedient,  and  is  disposed  to  lead  a  life  of  holiness.  Thus  every  hindrance  which 
exists  in  a  human  government  to  pardon  is  removed  in  the  divine  administration  :  the  honour  of 
law  is  secured  ;  the  feelings  of  benevolence  are  gratified,  and  the  sinner  becomes  obedient  and 
holy. 

(71  We  have  in  this  chapter  (ver.  IG)  an  instance  of  the  confidence  which  wicked  men  are  con- 
strained to  express  in  the  true  God,  Darius  had  no  doubt  that  the  God  whom  Daniel  served 
was  able  to  protect  and  deliver  him.  The  same  may  bo  said  now.  Wicked  men  know  that  it 
is  safe  to  trust  in  God ;  that  he  is  able  to  save  his  friends ;  that  there  is  more  security  in  the 
■ways  of  virtue  than  in  the  ways  of  sin ;  and  that  when  human  help  fails,  it  is  proper  to  repose 
on  the  Almighty  arm.  There  is  a  feeling  in  the  human  heart  that  they  who  confide  in  God 
are  safe,  and  that  it  is  proper  to  rely  on  his  arm;  and  even  a  wicked  father  will  not  hesitate  to 
exhort  a  Christian  son  or  daughter  to  .serve  their  God  faithfully,  and  to  confide  in  him  in  the 
trials  and  temptations  of  life.  Kthan  Allen  of  Vermont,  distinguished  in  the  American  revo- 
lution, was  an  infidel.  His  wife  was  an  eminent  Christi.an.  'When  he  was  about  to  die,  he  was 
asked  which  of  the  two  he  wi.shed  his  son  to  imitate  in  his  religious  views — his  father  or  his 
mother.     He  replied,  '  His  mother.' 

(8)  The  righteous  may  look  for  the  divine  protection  and  favour  (ver.  22);  that  is,  it  is 
an  advantage  in  this  world  of  danger,  and  temptation,  and  trial,  to  be  truly  religious;  or, 
in  other  words,  those  who  are  righteous  may  confidently  expect  the  divine  interpo.sition  in 
their  behalf  It  is,  indeed,  a  question  of  -some  difficulty,  but  of  much  importance,  to  what 
extent,  and  in  what  forms  we  are  authorized  now  to  look  for  the  divine  interposition  in  our 
behalf,  or  what  is  the  re.al  benefit  of  religion  in  this  world,  .so  far  as  the  divine  protection  is 
concerned ;  and  on  this  point  it  .seems  not  inappropriate  to  bay  down  a  few  principles  that 
may  be  of  use,  and  that  may  be  a  proper  application  of  the  passage  before  us  to  our  own  cir- 
cumstances : 

(A)  There  is  then  a  class  of  Scripture  promises  that  refer  to  such  protection,  and  that  lead  us 
to  believe  that  we  may  look  for  the  divine  interference  in  favour  of  the  righteous,  or  tliat  there 
ia.  in  this  respect,  an  advantage  in  true  religion.  In  support  of  this,  reference  may  be  made 
to  the  following,  among  other  passages  of  Scripture:  Vs.  xxxiv.  7,  17 — 22;  Iv.  22;  xci.  1 — 8; 
Isa.  xliii.  1,  2;  Luke  xii.  6,7;  Ileb.  i.  14,  xiii.  5,  G. 

(B)  In  regard  to  the  proper  interpretation  of  these  passages,  or  to  the  nature  and  extent  of 
the  divine  interposition  which  we  may  expect  in  behalf  of  the  righteouSj  it  muy  be  recaarked 

24* 


282  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  537 

X.  That  we  are  not  to  expect  now  the  following  things : 

(a)  The  divine  interposition  by  miracle.  It  is  the  common  opinion  of  the  Christian  ■world 
that  the  aire  of  miracles  is  past,  and  certainlj'  there  is  nothing  in  the  Bible  that  anthorizes  us 
to  expect  that  God  will  new  interpose  for  us  in  that  manner.  It  would  be  a  whollj-  illogical 
inference,  however,  to  maintain  that  there  never  lias  been  any  sucli  interposition  in  kehalf  of 
the  righteous — since  a  reason  may  have  existed  for  such  an  interposition  in  former  times  which 
may  not  exist  now. 

(6)  We  are  not  authorized  to  expect  that  God  will  interpose  by  sending  his  angels  visibly  to 
protect  and  deliver  us  in  the  day  of  peril.  The  fair  interpretation  of  those  passages  of  Scripture 
which  refer  to  that  subject,  as  Ps.  xxxiv.  7,  Ileb.  i.  1-t,  does  not  require  us  to  believe  that  there 
will  be  such  interposition,  and  there  is  no  evidence  that  such  interposition  takes  place.  This 
fact,  however,  should  not  be  regarded  as  proof,  either  (1)  that  no  such  visible  interposition  has 
ever  occurred  in  former  times — since  it  in  no  way  demonstrates  that  point ;  or  (2)  that  the 
angels  may  not  interpose  iu  our  behalf  now,  though  to  us  invisible.  For  any  thing  that  can  be 
proved  to  the  contrary,  it  may  still  he  true  that  the  angels  may  be,  invisibly,  '  ministering 
spirits  to  those  who  shall  be  heirs  of  salvation,'  and  that  they  may  be  sent  to  accompany  the 
souls  of  the  righteous  on  their  way  to  heaven,  as  they  were  to  conduct  Lazarus  to  Abraham's 
bo.som.  Luke  xvi.  22. 

(c)  We  are  not  authorized  to  expect  that  God  will  set  aside  the  regular  laws  of  nature  in  our 
behalf — that  he  will  thus  interpose  for  us  in  regard  to  diseases,  to  pestilence,  to  storms,  to  mil- 
dew, to  the  ravages  of  the  locust  or  the  caterpillar-^for  this  would  be  a  miracle,  and  all  the 
interposition  which  we  are  entitled  to  expect  must  be  consistent  with  the  belief  that  the  laws 
of  nature  will  be  regarded. 

(f/)  We  are  not  authorized  to  expect  that  the  righteous  will  never  be  overwhelmed  with  the 
wicked  in  calamity — that  in  an  explosion  on  a  steamboat,  in  a  shipwreck,  in  fire  or  flood,  in  an 
earthquake  or  in  the  pestilence,  that  they  will  not  be  cut  down  together.  To  suppose  that  God 
would  directly  interpose  in  belialf  of  his  people  in  such  cases,  would  be  to  suppose  that  there 
would  be  miracles  still,  and  there  is  nothing  in  the  Bible,  or  in  the  facts  that  occur,  to  justify 
such  an  expectation. 

II.  The  divine  interposition  which  we  are  authorized  to  expect,  may  be  referred  to  under  the 
following  particulars: 

(a)  All  events,  great  and  small,  are  under  the  control  of  the  God  who  loves  righteousness — 
the  God  of  the  righteous.  Not  a  sparrow  falls  to  the  ground  without  his  notice;  not  an  event 
happens  without  his  permission.  If,  therefore,  calamity  comes  upon  the  righteous,  it  is  not 
because  the  world  is  without  control;  it  is  not  because  God  could  not  prevent  it;  it  must  be 
because  he  sees  it  best  that  it  should  be  so. 

(6)  There  is  a  general  course  of  events  that  is  favourable  to  virtue  and  religion ;  that  is,  there 
is  a  state  of  things  on  earth  which  demonstrates  that  there  is  a  moral  government  over  men. 
The  essence  of  such  a  government,  as  liishop  Butler  (Analogy)  has  shown,  is,  that  virtue,  in  the 
course  of  tilings,  is  rewarded  as  virtue,  and  that  vice  is  punished  as  vice.  This  course  of  things 
is  so  settled  and  clear  as  to  show  that  God  is  the  friend  of  virtue  and  religion,  and  the  enemy 
of  vice  and  irreligion — that  is,  that,  under  his  administration,  the  one,  an  a  great  law,  has  a 
tendency  to  promote  happiness;  the  other  to  produce  misery.  But  if  so,  there  is  an  advantage 
in  being  righteous;  or  there  is  a  divine  interposition  in  behalf  of  the  righteous. 

(c)  There  are  large  classes  of  evils  which  a  man  will  certainly  avoid  by  virtue  and  religion, 
and  those  evils  are  among  the  most  severe  that  afflict  mankind.  A  course  of  virtue  and  reli- 
gion will  make  it  certain  that  those  evils  will  never  come  upon  him  or  his  family.  Thus,  for 
example,  by  so  simple  a  thing  as  total  abstinence  from  intoxicating  drinks,  a  man  will  certainly 
avoid  all  the  evils  that  afl3ict  the  drunkard — the  poverty,  disease,  disgrace,  wretchedness,  and  ruin 
of  body  and  soul  which  are  certain  to  follow  from  intemperance.  I5y  chastity,  a  man  will  avoid 
the  woes  that  come,  iu  the  righteous  visitation  of  God,  on  the  debauchee,  in  the  form  of  tho 
most  painful  and  loathsome  of  the  diseases  that  afflict  our  race.  By  integrity,  a  man  will  avoid 
the  evils  of  imprisonment  for  crime,  and  the  disgrace  which  attaches  to  its  committal.  And 
by  religion — pure  religion — by  the  calmness  of  mind  which  it  produces:  the  confidence  in 
God;  the  cheerful  submission  to  his  will;  the  contentment  which  it  causes,  and  the  hopes  of  a 
better  world  which  it  inspires,  a  man  will  certainly  avoid  a  large  class  of  evils  which  unsettle 
the  mind,  and  which  fill  with  wretched  victims  the  asylum  for  the  insane.  Let  a  man  take  up 
the  report  of  an  insane  asylum,  and  ask  what  proportion  of  its  inmates  would  have  been  saved 
from  so  fearful  a  malady  by  true  religion — by  the  calmness  which  it  produces  iu  trouble ;  by 
its  influence  in  moderating  the  passions  and  restraining  the  desires;  by  the  acquiesence  in 
the  will  of  God  which  it  produces,  and  he  will  be  surprised  at  the  number  which  would  have 
been  saved  it  from  the  dreadful  evils  of  insanity.  As  an  illustration  of  this,  I  took  up  the 
Keport  of  the  Pennsylvania  Hospital  for  the  Insane  for  the  year  IS.'iO,  which  happened  to  be 
lying  before  me,  and  looked  to  see  what  were  the  causes  of  insanity  iu  regard  to  the  inmates 
tl  the  Asylum,  with  a  view  to  the  inquiry  what  proportion  of  them  would  probably  have  been 
paved  from  it  by  the  proper  influence  of  religion.  Of  1599  patients  whose  cases  were  referred 
to,  I  found  the  following,  a  large  part  of  whom,  it  may  be  supposed,  would  have  been  saved 
fecm  insanity  if  their  minds  had  liecn  under  the  proper  influence  of  the  gospel  of  Christ,  re- 
straining them  from  sin,  moderating  their  passions,  checking  their  desires,  and  giving  them 
'aimnesB  and  submission  in  the  midst  of  trouble: — 


B.C.  555.]  CHAPTER    VII.  283 

Intemperance,   -..•••  'SS 


Loss  of  property, 

Dread  of  poverty, 

Intense  study, 

Domestic  difficulties, 

Grief  for  the  loss  of  friends,     - 

Intense  application  to  business, 

Keligious  excitement, 

"Want  of  employment, 

Mortiiied  pride, 

Use  of  opium  and  tobacco, 

Mental  auxietj'. 


72 
2 

19 
43 
77 
13 
61 
24 
3 
lO 
77 


(d)  There  are  cases  where  God  seems  to  interpose  in  behalf  of  the  righteous  directly,  la 
iinswi^r  to  prayer,  in  times  of  sickness,  poverty,  and  danger — raising  them  up  from  the  bor- 
ders of  the  grave;  pi'oviding  for  their  wants  in  a  manner  which  appears  to  be  as  providential 
as  when  the  ravens  fed  Elijah,  and  rescuing  them  from  danger.  There  are  numerous  such 
caFes  which  cannot  be  well  accounted  for  on  any  other  supposition  than  that  God  does  directly 
interpose  in  their  behalf,  and  show  them  these  mercies  because  they  are  his  friends.  These  are 
not  miracles.  The  purpose  to  do  this  was  a  part  of  the  original  plan  when  the  world  was  made, 
and  the  prayer  and  the  interposition  are  only  the  fulfilling  of  the  eternal  decree. 

(f)  God  does  interpose  in  behalf  of  his  children  in  giving  them  support  and  consolation;  in 
sustaining  them  in  the  time  of  trial ;  in  upholding  them  in  bereavement  and  sorrow,  and  in 
granting  them  peace  as  they  go  into  the  valley  of  the  shadow  of  death.  The  evidence  here  is 
clear,  that  there  is  a  degree  of  comfort  and  peace  given  to  true  Christians  in  such  seasons,  and 
given  in  consequence  of  their  religion,  which  is  not  granted  to  the  wicked,  and  to  which  the  de- 
votees of  the  world  are  strangers.  And  if  these  things  are  so,  then  it  is  clear  that  there  is  aa 
advantage  in  this  life  in  being  righteous,  and  that  God  does  now  interpose  in  the  course  of 
events,  and  in  the  day  of  trouble,  in  behalf  of  his  friends. 

(9)  God  often  overrules  the  malice  of  men  to  make  himself  known,  and  constrains  the  wicked 
to  acknowledge  him,  vs.  25 — 27.  Darius,  like  Nebuchadnezzar,  was  constrained  to  acknowledge 
him  as  the  true  God,  and  to  make  proclamation  of  this  throughout  his  vast  empire.  So,  often 
by  his  providence,  God  constrains  the  wicked  to  acknowledge  him  as  the  true  God,  and  as 
ruling  in  the  affairs  of  men.  His  interpositions  are  so  app.arent;  his  works  are  so  vast;  the 
proofs  of  his  administration  are  so  clear;  and  he  so  defeats  the  counsels  of  the  wicked,  that 
they  cannot  but  feel  that  he  rule.s,  and  they  cannot  but  acknowledge  and  proclaim  it.  It  is  in 
this  way  that  from  age  to  age  God  is  raising  up  a  great  number  of  witnesses  even  among  the 
wicked  to  acknowledge  his  existence,  and  to  procl.aim  the  great  truths  of  his  government ;  and 
it  is  in  this  way,  among  others,  that  he  is  constraining  the  intellect  of  the  world  to  bow  before 
him.  Ultimately  all  this  will  be  so  clear,  that  the  intellect  of  the  world  will  acknowledge  it, 
and  all  kings  and  people  will  see,  as  Darius  did,  that  'he  is  the  living  God,  and  steadfast  for- 
ever, and  his  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be  destroyed,  and  his  dominion  shall  be  unto  tha 
end.' 


CHAPTER  VII. 

2  1.   ANALYSIS  OF  THE  CHAPTER. 

This  chapter  contains  an  account  of  a  remarkable  prophetic  dream  which  Daniel  had  in  the 
first  year  of  the  reign  of  Belshazzar,  and  of  the  interpretation  of  the  dream.  After  a  brief  state- 
ment of  the  contents  of  the  chapter,  it  will  be  proper,  in  order  to  its  more  clear  exposition,  to 
state  the  different  methods  which  have  been  proposed  for  interpreting  it,  or  the  different  views 
of  its  application  which  h.ave  been  adopted.  The  chapter  comprises  the  following  main  points: 
Uie  vision,  vs.  1 — 14,  and  the  explanation,  vs.  15 — 28. 

I.  The  vision,  vs.  1 — 14.  The  dream  occurred  in  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  Belshazzar,  and 
was  immediately  written  out.  Daniel  is  represented  as  standing  near  the  sea,  and  a  violent 
wind  raged  upon  the  sea,  tossing  the  waves  in  wild  commotion.  Suddenly  he  sees  four  mon- 
sters emerge  from  the  agitated  waves,  each  one  apparently  remaining  for  a  little  time,  and  then 
disappearing.  The  first,  in  its  general  form,  resembled  a  lion,  but  had  wings  like  an  eagle.  On 
this  he  attentively  gazed,  until  the  wings  were  plucked  away,  and  the  beast  was  made  to  stand 
upriAt  as  a  man,  and  the  he.art  of  a  man  was  given  to  it.  Nothing  is  said  as  to  wliat  became 
of  the  beast  after  this.  Then  there  appeared  a  second  beast,  resembling  a  bear,  raising  itself  up 
on  one  side,  and  having  three  ribs  in  its  mouth,  and  a  command  was  given  to  it  to  arise  and 
devour  much  flesh.  Nothing  is  said  further  of  what  became  of  this  beast.  Then  there  aro.<!e 
another  beast  like  a  leopard,  with  four  wings,  and  four  head.",  and  to  this  beast  was  given  wide 


284  DANIEL.  [B.C.  555. 

dominlra.  Nothinfc  is  sr.icl  as  to  -what  tccamo  of  thi?  animal.  Then  there  arose  a  fourth  heasl 
more  remarkable  Ktill.  Its  form  is  not  nientionct),  but  it  was  fierce  and  stronn:.  It  had  great 
iron  teeth.  It  trampled  down  everythin;;  before  it,  and  devoured  and  brake  in  (.iires.  This 
beast  had  at  first  ten  horns,  but  soon  there  spran;;  up  in  the  midst  of  lliem  another— a  smaller 
horn  at  tirst.  but  as  this  increased  three  of  the  ten  horns  were  plucked  up  by  the  roots — ana- 
rently  either  liy  thi.s,  or  in  order  to  give  place  to  it.  What  was  more  remarkable  still,  in  this 
smaller  horn  their  appeared  the  eyes  of  a  man — emblematic  of  intelli;j:eDce  and  vif;ilance,  and  a 
mouih  .speaking  great  things — indicative  of  pride  and  arrogance.  Daniel  looked  on  this  singu- 
lar vision  till  a  throne  was  set  up  or  established,  and  then  the  Ancient  of  Days  did  sit^ — till  the 
old  forms  of  domination  ceased,  and  the  reign  of  God  was  introduced  and  established.  Uu 
contemplated  it  till,  on  account  of  the  great  words  which  the  'horn  spake,'  the  beast  was 
slain,  and  his  body  was  destroyed,  and  given  to  burning  flame.  In  the  meantime  the  dominion 
was  taken  away  from  the  other  beasts ;  though  their  existence  was  prolonged  for  a  little  time. 
Then  appeared  in  vision  one  in  the  form  of  man.  who  came  to  the  Ancient  of  Day.s.  and 
there  was  given  to  him  universal  dominion  over  all  people — a  kingdom  that  should  never  be 
destroyed. 

II.  The  interpretation  of  the  vision,  vs.  15 — 28.  Daniel  was  greatly  troubled  at  the  vision 
■which  he  had  seen,  and  he  approached  one  who  stood  near,  and  asked  him  the  meaning  of  it, 
vs.  15,  16.  The  explanation  with  which  he  was  favoured,  was,  in  general,  the  following:  That 
those  four  beasts,  which  he  had  seen,  represented  four  kings  or  kingdoms  which  would  exist  on 
the  earth,  and  that  the  great  design  of  the  vision  was  to  state  the  fact  that  the  saints  of  the 
Most  High  would  ultimately  possess  the  kingdom,  and  would  reign  forever,  vs.  17,  18.  The 
grand  purpose  of  the  vi.-ion  was  to  represent  the  succession  of  dynasties,  and  the  particular 
character  of  each  one,  until  the  government  over  the  world  would  pass  into  the  hands  of  the 
people  of  God,  or  until  the  actual  rule  on  the  earth  .should  be  in  the  hands  of  the  righteous. 
The  ultimate  object,  the  thing  to  which  all  revolutions  tended,  and  which  was  designed  to  be 
indicated  in  the  vision,  was  the  final  reign  of  the  saints  on  the  earth.  There  was  to  be  a  time 
when  the  kingdom  under  the  whole  heaven  was  to  be  given  to  the  people  of  the  saints  of  the 
Most  High;  or,  in  other  words,  there  would  be  a  state  of  things  on  the  earth,  when  'all 
dominion.',' or  all  'rulers'  (Magin,  ver.  27)  would  obey  him.  This  general  announcement 
in  reference  to  the  ultimate  thing  contemplated,  and  to  the  three  first  kingdoms,  repre- 
sented by  the  three  first  beasts,  was  satisfoctory  to  Daniel,  but  he  was  still  perplexed  in  regard 
to  the  particular  thing  designed  to  be  represented  by  the  fourth  beast,  so  remarkable  in  its 
structure,  so  unlike  all  the  other.s,  and  undergoing  so  surprising  a  transformation,  vs.  19 — 22. 
The  sum  of  what  was  stated  to  him,  in  regard  to  the  events  represented  by  the  fourth  beast,  is 
as  follows  :  (1)  that  this  was  designed  to  represent  a  fourth  kingdom  or  dynasty  which  would 
arise  upon  the  earth,  in  many  respects  different  from  the  three  which  would  precede  it.  It  was 
to  be  a  kingdom  which  would  be  distinguished  for  oppressive  conquests.  It  would  subdue  the 
whole  earth,  and  it  would  crush,  and  prostrate,  and  trample  down  those  whom  it  invaded. 
The  description  would  characterize  a  dominion  that  would  be  stern,  and  mighty,  and  cruel, 
and  successful ;  that  would  keep  the  nations  which  it  subdued  under  its  control  by  the  terror 
of  arms  rather  than  by  the  administration  of  just  laws,  ver.  2.3.  (2)  The  ten  horns  that  Daniel 
saw  spring  out  of  its  he.ad,  denoted  ten  kings  that  would  arise,  or  a  succession  of  rulers  that 
would  sway  the  authority  of  the  kingdom,  ver.  24.  (3)  The  other  horn  that  sprang  \ip  among 
the  ten,  and  after  them,  denoted  another  dynasty  that  would  arise,  and  this  would  have  pecu- 
liar characteristics.  It  would  .so  for  have  connection  with  the  former  that  it  would  spring  out 
of  them,  but  in  most  important  respects  it  would  differ  from  them.  Its  characteristics  may  be 
summed  up  as  follows:  (a)  it  would  spring  from  their  midst,  or  be  somehow  attached,  or  con- 
nected with  them — as  the  horn  sprang  from  the  head  of  the  beast — and  this  would  properly 
denote  that  the  new  power  somehow  sprung  from  the  dynasty  denoted  by  the  fourth  beast — as 
the  horn  .sprang  from  the  head  of  that  beast ;  {i)  though  springing  from  that,  it  would  be  '  diverse' 
from  it,  having  a  character  to  be  determined,  not  from  the  mere  fact  of  its  origin,  but  from  some- 
thing else ;  (c)  it  would  '  subdue  three  of  these  kings ;'  that  is,  it  would  overcome  and  prostrate 
a  certain  portion  of  the  power  and  authority  denoted  by  the  ten  horns — perhaps  meaning  that 
it  would  usurp  something  like  one-third  of  the  power  of  the  kingdom  denoted  by  the  fourth 
beast ;  (d)  it  would  be  characterized  by  arrogance  and  haughtiness — so  much  .so  that  the  fair  con- 
struction of  its  claims  would  be  that  of  'speaking  against  the  Most  High;'  (e)it  would  '  wear 
out  the  saints  of  the  Most  High' — evidently  referring  to  per.secution  ;  (/)  it  would  claim  legis- 
lative authority  so  as  to  '  change  times  and  laws' — or  clearly  referring  to  .some  claim  set  up 
over  established  laws,  or  to  unusual  authority,  vs.  24,  25.  (4)  Into  the  hand  of  this  new  power, 
all  these  things  would  be  given  for  'a  time,  and  times,  and  half  a  time  :'  implying  that  it  would 
not  be  permanent,  but  would  come  to  an  end,  ver.  25.  (5)  After  that  there  would  be  a  judg- 
ments— a  judicial  determination  in  regard  to  this  new  power,  and  the  dominion  would  be  taken 
away,  to  be  uttei'ly  destroyed,  ver.  2G.  (0)  There  would  come  a  period  when  the  whole  do- 
minion of  the  earth  would  pass  into  the  hands  of  the  saints ;  or,  in  other  words,  there  would 
be  a  universal  reign  of  the  principles  of  truth  and  righteousnes.s,  ver.  27. 

In  the  conclusion  of  the  chapter  (ver.  28).  Daniel  says  that  these  communications  deeply 
affocted  his  heart.  He  had  been  permitted  to  look  far  into  futurity,  and  to  contemplate  vast 
changes  in  th(!  progress  of  human  affairs,  and  even  to  look  forward  to  a  period  when  all  the 
nations  would  be  brought  under  the  dominion  of  the  law  of  God,  and  the  friends  of  the  Most 
High  would  be  put  in  possession  of  all  power.  Such  events  were  fitted  to  fill  the  mind  with 
lolema  thoughtj  and  it  is  not  wonderful  that  he  contemplated  them  with  deep  emotion- 


B.C.555.]  CHAPTER   VII.  285 

J  2.   VARIOUS   METHODS  OF   INTERPRETIXO   THIS   ClIAPTEP.. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say  that  there  hare  hccn  very  (lifTorent  mcthoils  of  interpreting  this 
':hapter,  and  that  the  views  of  its  proper  interpretation  arc  by  no  means  agreed  on  by  exposi- 
tors.  It  may  be  useful  to  refer  to  some  of  those  methods  before  we  advance  to  its  exposition, 
that  they  may  be  before  the  mind  in  its  consideration.  We  shall  be  the  better  al>le  to  ascep- 
taia  what  is  the  true  interpretation  by  enquirini:  which  of  them,  if  any,  accords  with  the  fair 
exposition  of  the  lans^uane  employed  by  the  sacred  writer.  The  opinions  entertained  maybe 
reduced  to  the  following  classes  : 

I.  Hardt  supposes  that  the  four  beasts  here  denote  four  particular  kings — Nebuchadnezzar, 
Evil-Merodach,  Belshazzar,  and  Cyrus. 

II.  Ephroim,  who  is  followed  by  Eichhorn,  supposes  that  the  first  beast  referred  to  the  Baby- 
lonish-Chaldean kinjidom  ;  the  second  the  Medish  empire  under  Cyaxares  II.,  the  three  'ribs' 
of  which  denote  the  Jlcdish,  Persian,  and  Chaldean  portions  of  that  empire;  the  third  the  Pen 
sian  empire,  the  four  heads  and  wings  of  which  denote  the  spread  of  the  Persian  empire  to- 

Tards  the  four  regions  under  heaven,  or  to  all  parts  of  the  world;  the  fourth  to  the  Grecian 
impire  under  Alexander  and  bis  successors,  the  ten  horns  of  which  denote  ten  eminent  kings 
among  the  successors  of  Alexander,  and  the  'little  horn'  that  sprang  up  among  them,  Antio- 
chus  Epiphaues.  The  succeeding  state  of  things,  according  to  Ephra;m  and  Eiclihoru,  refers  to 
the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah. 

III.  Grolius,  representing  another  class  of  interpreter.',  whom  Iletzel  follows,  supposes  that 
the  succession  of  the  kingdoms  here  referred  to  is  the  Uabyloni.shChaldean;  the  Persian;  the 
kingdom  of  Alexander  and  his  successors.     The  fifth  is  the  lloman  empire. 

IV.  The  most  common  interpretation  which  has  prevailed  in  the  church  is  that  which  sup- 
poses that  the  first  beast  denotes  the  Chaldean  kingdom;  the  second  the  Medo-Persian ;  the 
third  the  Greek  empire  under  .Mcxander  and  his  successors ;  the  fourth  the  Itoman  empire. 
The  dominion  of  the  saints  is  the  reign  of  the  Messiah  and  his  laws.  But  this  opinion,  particu- 
larly as  far  as  pertains  to  the  fourth  and  fifth  of  these  kingdom.?,  has  had  a  great  variety  of 
modifications,  especially  in  reference  to  the  signification  of  the  ten  horn.s,  and  the  little  ijorn 
that  sprang  up  among  them.  Some,  who  under  the  fifth  kingdom,  suppose  that  the  reign  of 
Christ  is  referred  to,  regard  the  fourth  kingdom  as  relating  to  Home  under  the  Caesars,  and  that 
the  ten  horns  refer  to  a  succession  of  ten  regents,  and  the  little  horn  to  Julius  CKsar.  Others, 
who  refer  the  last  empire  to  th«  personal  reign  of  Christ  on  the  earth,  and  the  kingdom  which 
he  would  set  up,  suppose  that  the  ten  horns  refer  to  ten  kings  or  dynasties  that  sprang  out  of 
the  Koman  power — either  a  succession  of  the  emperors;  or  those  who  came  in  after  the  inva- 
sion of  the  northern  hordes;  or  certain  kingdoms  of  Europe  which  succeeded  the  Koman  power 
after  it  fell,  and  by  the  little  horn,  they  suppose  that  either  the  Turkish  power  with  its  various 
branches  is  designated,  or  Mohammed,  or  the  Papacy,  or  Antichrist. 

V.  The  Jews,  in  general,  suppose  that  the  fifth  kingdom  refers  to  the  reign  of  the  Messiah; 
but  still  there  has  been  great  diversity  of  views  among  them  in  regard  to  the  application  of 
particular  parts  of  the  prophecy.  Many  of  the  older  interpreters  among  them  supposed  that 
the  ten  horns  denoted  ten  Koman  Ctesars,  and  that  the  last  hor^  referred  to  Titus  Vespasian. 
Most  of  the  later  Jewi.-:h  interpreters  refer  this  to  their  fabulous  Gog  and  Magog. 

A'l.  Another  interpretation  which  has  had  its  advocates  is  that  which  supposes  that  the  first 
kingdom  was  the  Chaldean  ;  the  second  the  Persian;  the  third  that  of  Alexander;  the  fourth 
that  of  his  successors,  and  the  fifth  that  of  the  Asmonein  princes  who  rose  up  to  deliver  the 
Jewish  nation  from  the  despotism  of  the  Syrian  kings. 

VII.  As  a  specimen  of  one  mode  of  interpretation  which  has  prevailed  to  some  extent  in  the 
church,  the  opinion  of  Cocteius  may  be  referred  to.  He  supposes  that  the  first  beast,  with  the 
eagle's  wings,  denoted  the  reign  of  the  christian  emperors  in  Home,  and  the  spread  of  Chris- 
tianity under  them  into  remote  regions  of  the  ]'2ast  and  AVest ;  the  second,  with  the  three  ribs 
in  his  mouth,  tlie  Ariam  Goths,  Vandals,  and  Lombards;  the  third,  with  the  fovir  heads  and 
four  wings,  the  Mohammedan  kingdom  with  the  four  Caliphates;  the  fourth,  the  kingdom  of 
Charlemagne,  and  the  ten  horns  in  this  kingdom,  the  Carolingians,  Saxons,  Salish,  Swedish, 
Hollandish,  English,  &.C.,  princes  and  dynasties  or  people ;  and  the  little  horn,  the  Papacy  as 
the  actual  Antichrist. 

The  statement  of  these  various  opinions,  and  methods  of  interpretation,  I  have  translated 
from  Bcrtholdt,  Daniel,  pp.  419 — i2li.  To  these  should  be  added  the  opinion  which  Bertholdt 
himself  maintains,  and  which  has  been  held  by  many  others,  and  which  Bertholdt  has  explained 
and  defended  at  length,  pp.  426 — i46.  That  opinion  is,  substantially,  that  the  first  kingdom  is 
the  Babylonish  kingdom  under  Nebuchadnezzar,  .and  that  the  wings  of  the  first  beast  denote 
the  extendcHl  spread  of  that  empire.  The  .second  beast,  with  the  three  '  ribs,'  or  favgs,  denotes 
the  Median,  Lydian,  and  Babylonish  kingdoms,  which  were  erected  under  one  sceptre,  the  Per- 
sian. The  third  beast,  with  the  four  wings  and  four  heads,  denotes  the  Grecian  dynasty  under 
Alexander,  and  the  spread  of  that  kingdom  throughout  the  four  parts  of  the  world.  The  fourth 
beast  denotes  the  kingdom  of  the  Lagidre  and  Seleucida?,  under  which  the  Hebrews  suffered  so 
much.  The  statement  respecting  this  kingdom  (ver.  7),  that  '  it  was  diverse  from  all  that  went 
Vjorc  it,'  refers  to  the  ^pluralitij  of  the  fourth  kingdom,'  or  the  fact  that  it  was  an  aggregatt 
iiiaao  np  of  many  others — a  kingdom  in  a  collective  sense.  The  '  ten  horns  '  denote  ten  suo- 
ces.^ive  princes  or  kings  in  that  kingdom,  and  Bertholdt  enumerates  them  in  the  following 
order:  1.  Seleucus  Nicator ;  2.  Antiochus  Soter;  3.  Antiochus  Theos;  4.  Seleucus  Kallinicus; 
6.  Seleucas  KcrauQus ;  6.  Antiochus  the  Great ;  7.  Selrmcus  PUilopater;  8.  UcUodorus;  9.  Fto 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555. 


lemy  rhUometer;  10.  Demetrius.  The  eleventh — denoted  by  the  little  horn— was  Antiocbus 
Epiph.ines,  who  broui;ht  fo  many  calamities  upon  the  Hebrew  people.  His  nign  lasted,  ac- 
cording to  Bertholdt,  '  a  time,  and  times,  and  half  a  lime ' — or  three  years  and  a  half;  and  then 
the  kingdom  was  restored  to  the  people  of  God  to  be  a  permanent  reign,  and,  ultimately,  under 
the  Messiah,  to  till  the  world  and  endure  to  the  end  of  time. 

The  interpretation  thus  stated,  suppo-sing  that  the  '  little  horn '  refers  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
is  also  maintained  by  Prof.  Stuart.  Hints  on  prophecy,  '2d.  cd.  pp.  ib — 98.  Compare  also  Com- 
qientary  on  Daniel,  pp.  173 — 194,  and  205 — 211. 

Amidst  such  a  variety  of  views,  the  only  hope  of  arriving  at  any  satisfactory  conclu.'^ion  respect- 
ing the  meaning  of  this  chapter  is  by  a  careful  examination  of  the  text,  and  the  fair  meaning  of 
the  symbols  employed  by  Daniel. 


1  In  the  first  year  of  Belshazzar 
king  of  Babylon,  Daniel  » had  a 
^  dream  and  visions  of  his  head  upon 


1.  7n  the  first  year  of  Belshazzar,  king 
of  Bahylon.  On  the  character  and  reign 
of  Eelshazzar,  see  Intro,  to  ch.  v.  ^  2. 
He  was  the  last  of  the  kings  of  Baby- 
lon, and  this  fact  may  cast  some  light 
on  the  disclosures  made  in  the  dream. 
^  Daniel  had  a.  dream.  Marg.  as  in 
Heb.  saiv.  He  saw  a  series  of  events  in 
vision  when  he  was  asleep.  The  dream 
refers  to  that  representation,  and  was  of 
such  a  nature  that  it  was  proper  to  speak 
of  it  as  if  ho  saw  it.  Comp.  Notes  on  ch. 
ii.  1.  ^  And  visions  of  his  head  xqwn  his 
bed.  Notes  on  ch.  iv.  5.  Theyi  he  wrote 
the  dream.  He  made  a  record  of  it  at  the 
time.  He  did  not  commit  it  to  tradition, 
or  wait  for  its  fulfillment  before  it  was  re- 
corded, but  long  before  the  events  referred 
to  occurred  he  committed  the  prediction 
to  writing,  that  when  the  prophecy  was 
fulfilled  they  might  be  compared  with  it. 
It  was  customary  among  the  prophets  to 
record  their  predictions,  whether  commu- 
nicated in  a  dream,  in  a  vision,  or  by 
words  to  them,  that  there  might  bo  no 
doubt  when  the  event  occurred  that  there 
had  been  an  inspired  prediction  of  it,  and 
that  there  might  be  an  opportunity  of  a 
careful  comparison  of  the  prediction  with 
the  event.  Often  the  prophets  were  com- 
manded to  record  their  predictions.  See 
Isa.  viii.  1,  IG,  xxx.  8,  Hab.  ii.  2.  Com- 
pare Rev.  i.  19,  xiv.  13,  xxi.  5.  In  many 
instances,  as  in  the  case  before  us,  the 
record  was  made  hundreds  of  years  before 
the  event  occurred,  and  as  there  is  all  the 
evidence  that  there  could  be  in  a  case  that 
the  record  has  not  been  altered  to  adapt 
it  to  the  event,  the  highest  proof  is  thus 
furnished  of  the  inspiration  of  the  pro- 
Dhets.  The  meaning  here  is,  that  Daniel 
xrote  'mt  the  dream  as  soon  as  it  occurred. 
%  And  told  the  stun  of  the  matters.     Chal., 


his  bed :  then  he  wrote  the  dream, 
a7id  told  the  sum  of  the  ■=  matters. 

»  saw.        •>  Nu.  12.  6 ;  c.  2.  28 ;  Am.  3.  7. 
<=  or,  words. 


'■  And  spake  the  head  of  the  words.'  That 
is,  he  spake  or  told  them  by  writing.  He 
made  a  communication  of  them  in  this 
manner  to  the  world.  It  is  not  implied 
that  he  made  any  oral  communication  of 
them  to  any  one,  but  that  he  communica- 
ted them — to  wit,  in  the  way  specified. 
The  word  sum  here — II'nt — means  head  ; 
and  would  properly  denote  such  a  record 
as  would  be  a  heading  up,  or  a  summary — 
as  stating  in  a  brief  way  the  contents  of 
a  book,  or  the  chief  points  of  a  thing  with- 
out going  into  detail.  The  meaning  here 
seems  to  be  that  he  did  not  go  into  de- 
tail— as  by  writing  names,  and  dates,  and 
places;  or,  perhaps,  that  he  did  not  en- 
ter into  a  minute  description  of  all  that 
he  saw  in  regard  to  the  beasts  that  came 
up  from  the  sea,  but  that  he  recorded 
what  might  be  considered  as  peculiar, 
and  as  having  special  significancy.  Tho 
Codex  Chisia.  renders  this,  typaipm  ti; 
)ct(pa\ata 'Xoyaiv — 'He  wrote  in  heads  of 
words,'  that  is,  he  reduced  it  to  a  sum- 
mary description.  It  is  well  remarked 
by  Lengerke,  on  this  place,  that  the  pro- 
phets, when  they  described  what  was  to 
occur  to  tyrants  in  future  times,  conveyed 
their  oracles  in  a  comparatively  dark  and 
obscure  manner,  yet  so  as  to  be  clear  when 
the  events  should  occur.  The  reason  of 
this  is  obvious.  If  the  meaning  of  many 
of  the  predictions  had  been  understood 
by  those  to  whom  they  referred,  that  fact 
would  have  been  a  motive  to  them  to  in. 
duce  them  to  defeat  them,  and  as  tho 
fulfilment  depended  on  their  voluntary 
agency,  the  prophecy  would  have  been 
void.  It  was  necessary,  therefore,  in  gen- 
eral, to  avoid  direct  predictions,  and  the 
mention  of  names,  dates,  and  places,  and  to 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER   VII, 


28: 


2  Daniel  spake  and  said,  I  saw 
in  my  vision  by  night,  and  behold, 


make  use  of  symbols  whose  meaning  would 
be  obscure  at  the  time  when  the  predic- 
tion was  made,  but  which  would  be  plain 
when  the  event  should  occur.  A  com- 
parison of  vs.  4,  9,  11,  14,  will  show  that 
only  a  summarij  of  what  was  to  occur  was 
recorded.  If  Matters.  Marg.,  as  in  Chald., 
words.  The  term  tcords,  however,  is  of- 
ten used  to  denote  things.  " 
2.  Daniel  spake  and  said.  That'is,  ho 
spake  and  said  in  the  manner  intimated 
in  the  previous  verse.  It  was  by  a  record 
made  at  the  time,  and  thus  he  might  be 
said  to  speak  to  his  own  generation  and 
to  all  future  times.  ^  I  saw  in  my  vision 
by  night.  I  beheld  in  the  vision ;  that 
is,  he  saw  represented  to  him  the  scene 
which  he  proceeds  to  describe.  He 
seemed  to  see  the  sea  in  a  tempest,  and 
these  monsters  came  up  from  it,  and  the 
strange  succession  of  events  which  fol- 
lowed. ^  And  behold,  the  four  winds  of 
the  heaven.  The  winds  that  blow  under 
the  heaven,  or  that  seem  to  come  from 
the  heaven — or  the  air.  Comp.  Jer. 
xlix.  36.  The  number  of  the  winds  is 
here  referred  to  us  four  as  they  are  now, 
as  blowing  mainly  from  the  four  quarters 
of  the  earth.  Nothing  is  more  common 
now  than  to  designate  them  in  this  man- 
ner, as  the  East,  the  South,  the  West, 
the  North  wind.  So  the  Latins — Eu- 
rus,  Auster,  Zephyrus,  Boreas.  ^  Strove. 
|niji^-  Burst,  or  rushed  forth;  seemed 
to  conflict  together.  The  winds  burst, 
rushed  from  all  quarters,  and  seemed  to 
me«t  on  the  sea,  throwing  it  into  wild 
commotion.  The  Hebrew  word — no  — 
means  to  break  or  burst  forth,  as  a  foun- 
tain or  stream  of  waters.  Job  xl.  23;  an 
infant  breaking  forth  from  the  womb. 
Job  xx.vviii.  S ;  a  warrior  rushing  forth 
to  battle,  Ezek.  xxxii.  2.  Hence  the 
Chaldean  to  break  forth  ;  to  rush  forth  as 
the  winds.  The  symbol  here  would  na- 
turally denote  some  wild  commotion 
among  the  nations  as  if  the  winds  of  hea- 
ven should  rush  together  in  confusion. 
^  Upon  the  great  sea.  This  expression 
would  properly  apply  to  a7iy  great  sea  or 
ocean,  but  it  is  probable  that  the  one 
that  would  occur  to  Daniel  would  bo  the 
Mediterranean  sea,  as  that  was  best  known 
U)  him  and  his  contemporaries.  A  hea- 
ving ocean — or   an    ocean    tossed   with 


!the  four  -winds  of  the  heaven  strove 
upon  the  great  sea. 

storms,  would  be  a  natural  emblem  to 
denote  a  nation,  or  nations,  agitated  with 
internal  conflicts,  or  nations  in  the  midst 
of  revolutions.  Among  the  sacred  poets 
and  the  prophets,  hosts  of  armies  invad- 
ing a  land  are  compared  to  overflowing 
waters,  and  mighty  changes  among  the 
nations  to  the  heaving  billows  of  the 
ocean  in  a  storm.  Comp.  Jer.  xlvi.  7,  8, 
xlvii.  2 ;  Isa.  viii.  7,  8,  xvii.  12,  lix.  19 ; 
Dan.  xi.  40 ;  Rev.  xiii.  1.  The  classic 
reader  will  be  reminded  in  the  descrip- 
tion here  of  the  words    of  Virgil,  iEn. 

I.  82,  scr^ 

Ac  Tcluti  agminc  facto 
Qua  data  porta  ruunt,  et  terras  turbine  pcrflaut. 
lucubuere  mari,  totumque  a  sedibus  imig 
Una  Eurus,  Notusque  ruunt,  creberque  procellis 
Africus,  et  vastos  volyunt  ad  littora  fluctus. 

Com.  also  Ovid,  Trist.  I.  2,  25,  seq.  It 
was  from  this  agitated  sea  that  the  beasts 
that  Daniel  saw,  representing  successive 
kingdoms,  seemed  to  rise  ;  and  the  fair 
interpretation  of  this  part  of  the  symbol 
is,  that  there  was,  or  would  be,  as  it  ap- 
peared in  vision  to  Daniel,  commotions 
among  the  nations  resembling  the  sea 
driven  by  storms,  and  that  from  these 
commotions  there  would  arise  succes- 
sive kingdoms  having  the  characteristics 
specified  by  tho  appearance  of  the  four 
beasts.  Wo  naturally  look,  in  the  fulfil- 
ment of  this,  to  some  state  of  things  in 
which  the  nations  were  agitated  and  con- 
vulsed ;  in  which  they  struggled  against 
each  other,  as  the  winds  strove  upon  the 
sea ;  a  state  of  things  which  ^:)reeec?erf 
the  rise  of  these  four  successive  king- 
doms. Without  now  pretending  to  de- 
termine whether  that  was  the  time 
denoted  by  this,  it  is  certain  that  all 
that  is  here  said  would  find  a  coun- 
terpart in  the  period  which  immedi- 
ately preceded  the  reign  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar,  or  the  kingdom  which  he  founded 
and  adorned.  His  rapid  and  extensive 
conquests  ;  the  agitation  of  the  nations 
in  self-defence,  and  their  wars  against 
one  another,  would  be  well  denoted  by 
the  agitation  of  the  ocean  as  seen  in 
vision  by  Daniel.  It  is  true  that  there 
have  been  many  other  periods  of  the 
world  to  which  the  image  would  be  appli- 
cable, but  no  one  can  doubt  that  it  was 
applicable  to  this  period,  and  that  would 
be  all  that  would  bo  necessary  if  the  de- 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555. 


3  And  four  great  beasts  came]  4  The  first  ?<!a5  like  a  blion,  and 
» up  from  the  sea,  diverse  one  from  ■  had  eagle's  <=  Avings  :  I  beheld  till 
another.  I  the   wings    thereof   were   plucked, 

» Kc.  13. 1.  b  Je.  4.  7.  I  «  De.  £8.  49.    Eze.  17. 3.    Hab.  1.  8 

sign  was  to  represent  a  series  of  king-  j 
doms  commencing  with  that  of  Nebu-  ] 
chadnezzar.  i 

3.  And  four  great  beasts  came  np  from  , 
the  sea.  Not  at  once,  but  in  succession. 
See  the  following  verses.  Their  parti-  i 
cular  form  is  described  in  the  subsequent  j 
verses.  Tlie  design  of  mentioning  them  ' 
here,  as  coming  up  from  the  sea,  seems  to 
have  been  to  show  that  this  succession 
of  kinsdoms  sprang  from  the  agitations  [ 
and  commotions  among  the  nations  re- ' 
presented  by  the  heaving  ocean.  It  is 
not  uncommon  for  the  prophets  to  make 
use  of  animals  to  represent  or  symbolize 
kingdoms  and  nations — usually  by  some 
animal  which  was  in  a  manner  peculiar 
to  the  land  that  was  symbolized,  or  which  \ 
abounded  there.  Thus  in  Isa.  xxvii.  1,  ' 
leviathan,  or  the  dragon,  or  crocodile,  is 
used  to  represent  Babylon.  See  Notes  on 
that  passage.  In  Ezek.  .xxis.  ,3 — 5,  the 
dragon  or  the  crocodile  of  the  Nile  is  put 
for  Pharaoh  ;  in  Ezek.  xxxii.  2,  Pharaoh 
is  compared  to  a  young  lion,  and  to  a 
whale  in  the  seas.  In  Ps.  Ixxiv.  13,  14, 
the  kingdom  of  Egypt  is  compared  to 
the  dragon  and  the  leviathan.  So  on 
ancient  coins,  animals  are  often  used  as 
emblems  of  kingdoms,  as  it  may  be  added, 
the  lion  and  the  unicorn  represent  Great 
Britain  now,  and  the  eagle  the  United 
States.  It  is  well  remarked  by  Lengerke, 
(i";i  loc)  that  wh.m  the  prophets  design  to 
represent  kingdoms  that  are  made  up  of 
other  kingdoms,  or  that  arc  combined  by 
being  brought  by  conquest  under  the 
power  of  others,  they  do  this,  not  by  any 
single  animal  as  actually  found  in  na- 
ture, but  by  monsters — fabulous  beings 
that  are  compounded  of  others,  in  which 
the  peculiar  qualities  of  difl'erent  animals 
are  brought  together — as  in  the  case  of 
the  lion  with  eagle's  wings.  Thus  in 
Rev.  xiii.  1,  the  Romish  power  is  repre- 
sented by  a  beast  coming  out  of  the 
sea  having  seven  heads  and  ten  horns. 
Comp.  ii.  Ezra  (Apocrj'.)  xi.  1,  where 
an  eagle  is  represented  as  coming  from 
the  sea  with  twelve  feathered  wings  and 
throe  heads.  As  an  illustration  of  the 
attempts  made  in  the  apocryphal  writ- 
Lr.gs  to  imitate  the  prophets,  the  whole 


of  ch.  xi.  and  oh.  xii.  of  the  second  book 
of  Ezra  may  be  referred  to.  ^  Diverse 
one  from  another.  Though  they  all  came 
up  from  the  same  abyss,  yet  they  differed 
from  each  other — denoting  doubtless  that 
thou^'h  the  successive  kingdoms  referred 
to  would  all  rise  out  of  the  nations  re- 
presented by  the  agitated  sea,  j-et  that 
in  important  respects  they  would  differ 
from  each  other. 

4.  The  first  was  lih-e  a  lion.  It  is  to  bs 
assumed  in  explaining  and  applying  these 
symbols,  that  they  are  significant — that 
is,  that  there  was  some  adaptedness  or 
propriety  in  using  these  symbols  to  de- 
note the  kingdoms  referred  to;  or  that 
in  each  case  there  was  a  reason  why  the 
particular  animal  was  selected  for  a  sym- 
bol rather  than  one  of  the  others  ;  that  is, 
there  was  something  in  the  lion  that  was 
better  fitted  to  symbolize  the  kingdom 
referred  to,  than  there  was  in  the  bear  or 
the  leopard,  and  this  was  the  reason  why 
this  particular  symbol  was  chosen  in  the 
case.  It  is  to  be  further  assumed  that  all 
the  characteristics  in  the  symbol  were 
significant,  and  we  are  to  expect  to  find 
them  all  in  the  kingdom  which  they  were 
designed  to  represent,  nor  can  the  sj'mbol 
be  fairly  applied  to  any  kingdom  unless 
something  shall  be  found  in  its  character 
or  history  that  shall  correspond  alike  to 
the  particular  circumstances  referred  to 
in  the  sj-mbol,  and  to  the  grouping  or 
succession.  In  regard  to  the  first  beast, 
there  were  five  things  that  entered  into 
the  symbol,  all  of  which  it  is  to  be  pre- 
sumed were  significant :  the  lion,  the 
eagle's  wings — the  fact  that  the  wings 
were  plucked — the  fact  that  the  beast 
was  lifted  up  so  as  to  stand  up  as  a  man — 
and  the  fact  that  the  heart  of  a  man  was 
given  to  it.  It  is  proper  to  consider 
these  in  their  order,  and  then  to  enquire 
whether  they  find  a  fulfillment  in  any 
known  state  of  things. 

(a)  The  animal  that  was  seen: — thch'on. 
The  lion,  'the  king  of  beasts,' is  the  sym- 
bol of  strength  and  courage,  and  becomes 
the  proper  emblem  of  a  king — as  when 
the  Mussulmans  call  Ali,  Mohammed's 
son-in-law,  'The  Lion  of  God,  always 
victorious.'     Thus  it  is  often  used  in  the 


B,  C.  555.1 


CHAPTER  VI  r 


289 


« and  it  was  lifted  up  from  the  earth, 
and  made  stand  upon  the  feet  as  a 

"  or,  wherewith. 

Scriptures,  Gen.  xlix.  9,  "Judah  is  a 
lion's  whelp ;  from  the  prey,  my  son,  art 
thou  gone  up ;  he  stooped  down,  he 
couched  as  a  lion,  and  as  an  old  lion  : 
who  shall  rouse  him  up?"  The  warlike 
character,  the  conquest,  the  supremacy, 
of  tlat  tribe  are  here  undoubtedly  de- 
noted. So  in  Ezck.  xix.  2,  3.  "What  is 
thy  mother  ?  A  lioness  :  she  lay  down 
among  lions,  she  nourished  her  whelps 
among  young  lions."  Here  is  an  allu- 
sion, says  Grotius,  to  Gen.  xlix.  9.  Judea 
was  among  the  nations  like  a  lioness 
among  the  beasts  of  the  forest;  she  had 
strength  and  sovereignty.  The  lion  is 
an  emblem  of  a  hero  :  2  Sam.  xix.  20, 
"He  slow  two  lion-like  men  of  Moab." 
Com.  Gesenius  zu  Isa.  i.  851.  So  Her- 
cules and  Achilles  are  called  by  Homer 
^vno\iovTa,  or  XeoitoSujuoi' — lion-hearted. 
II.  E.  G39,  n.  288,  Odys.  X.  760.  See  the 
character,  the  intrepidity,  and  the  habits 
of  the  lion  fully  illustrated  in  Bochart, 
Hieroz.  Lib.  iii.  c.  2,.pp.  723—745.  Cred- 
ner,  der  Prophet  Joel,  s.  100,  f.  Com- 
pare also  the  following  places  in  Scrip- 
ture, Ps.  vii.  3,  xxii.  22,  Ivii.  4,  Iviii.  7, 
Ixxiv.  4;  1  Sam.  xvii.  37;  Job  iv.  8; 
Jer.  iv.  7,  xlix.  19;  Joel  i.  6;  Isa.  xxix.  2. 
The  proper  notion  here,  so  far  as  the 
emblem  of  a  lion  is  concerned,  is  that  of 
a  king  or  kingdom  that  would  be  dis- 
tinguished for  power,  conquest,  dominion ; 
that  would  be,  in  relation  to  other  kings 
and  kingdoms,  as  the  lion  is  among  the 
beasts  of  the  forest — keeping  them  in 
awe,  and  maintaining  dominion  over 
them — marching  where  he  pleased,  with 
none  to  cope  with  him  or  to  visit  him. 

[h)  The  eagles'  wings: — and  had  ea- 
glen'  winr/s.  Hero  appears  one  peculi- 
arity of  the  emblem — the  union  of  things 
which  are  not  found  joined  together  in 
nature — the  representation  of  things  or 
qualities  which  no  one  animal  would  re- 
present. The  lion  would  denote  one  thing, 
or  one  quality  in  the  kingdom  referred 
to — power,  dominion,  sov'ireignty — but 
thera  would  be  some  characteristic  in 
that  king  or  kingdom  which  nothing  in 
tb.e  lion  wor.tld  properly  represent,  and 
which  could  be  symbolized  only  by  at- 
taching to  him  qualities  to  bo  found  in 
gome  other  animal.  The  lion,  distin- 
26 


man,  and  a  man's  heart  was  given 
to  it. 


guished  for  his  power,  his  dominion,  his 
keeping  other  animals  in  awe — his  spring, 
and  the  severity  of  his  blow — is  not  re- 
markable for  his  speed,  nor  for  r/oing forth 
to  conquest.  He  does  not  range  far  to 
accomplish  his  purpose,  nor  are  his  move- 
ments eminent  for  fleetncss.  Hence  there 
were  attached  to  the  lion  the  wings  of  au 
eagle.  A  cut  may  give  a  more  distinct 
impression  of  the  image  as  it  appeared  to 
Daniel.     The  proper  notion,  therefore,  of 


this  symbol,  would  ho  that  of  a  dominion  or 
conquest  ra];>idly  secured,  as  if  a,  lion,  the 
king  of  beasts,  should  move,  not  as  he 
commonly  does,  with  a  spring  or  bound, 
confining  himself  to  a  certain  space  or 
range,  but  should  move  as  the  eagle  does, 
with  rapid  and  prolonged  flight,  extend- 
ing his  conquests  afar.  The  meaning  of 
the  symbol  may  be  seen  by  comparing 
this  passage  with  Isa.  xlvi.  11,  where  Cy- 
rus is  compared  to  'a  ravenous  bird '— 
"calling  a  ravenous  bird  from  the  east, 
the  man  that  oxecuteth  my  counsels  from 
a  far  country."  The  eagle  is  an  emblem 
of  swiftness:  Jer.  iv.  13,  "his  horses  are 
swifter  than  eagles;"  xlviii.  40,  "  Behold, 
he  shall  fly  as  an  eagle,  and  shall  spread 
his  wings  over  Moab."  See  also  ch.  xlix. 
22,  Lam.  iv.  19,  Hab.  i.  8. 

(c)  The  clipping  of  the  wings  : — T beheld 
till  the  ici)i(/s  thereof  u-erc  plucked.  The 
word  used — •a-\^ — means  to  pluck  or  pull, 
as  to  pull  out  the  beard,  comp.  Neh.  xiii. 
25,  Isa.  1.  6,  and  would  here  be  properly 
applied  to  some  process  of  pulling  out  the 
feathers  or  quills  from  the  wings  of  the 
eagle.  The  obvious  and  proper  meaning 
of  this  symbol  is,  that  there  was  some 
check  put  to  the  progress  of  the  conqueror — 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555. 


as  there  would  be  to  an  eagle  by  pluck- 
ing off  the  feathers  from  his  wings  ;  that 
is,  the  rapidity  of  his  conquests  would 
cease.  The  prophet  says,  that  he  looked 
on  until  this  was  done,  implj'ing  that  it 
was  not  accomplished  at  once,  but  leaving 
the  impression  that  these  conquests  were 
extended  far.  They  were,  however, 
checked,  and  we  see  the  lion  again  with- 
out the  wings ;  the  sovereign  who  has 
ceased  to  spread  his  triumphs  over  the 
earth. 

(d)  The  lifting  up  from  the  earth  : — and 
it  icas  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  and  made 
stand  vpon  the  feet  as  a  man.  That  is,  the 
lion,  with  the  wings  thus  plucked  oif,  was 
made  to  stand  upright  on  his  hind  feet — 
an  unusual  position,  but  the  meaning  of 
the  symbol  is  not  difficult.  It  was  still 
the  lion — the  monarch — but  changed  as 
if  the  lion  was  changed  to  a  man  ;  that 
is,  as  if  the  ferocity,  and  the  power,  and 
the  energy  of  the  lion  had  given  place 
to  the  comparative  weakness  of  a  man. 
There  would  be  as  much  difference  in  the 
case  referred  to  as  there  would  be  if  a 
lion  so  fierce  and  powerful  should  be  made 
so  far  to  change  his  nature  as  to  stand 
upright,  and  to  walk  as  a  man.  This 
would  evidently  denote  some  remark.able 
change — something  that  would  be  unu- 
sual— something  where  there  would  be  a 
diminution  of  ferocitj',  and  yet  perhaps  a 
change  to  comparative  weakness— as  a 
man  is  feebler  than  a  lion. 

(e)  The  giving  to  it  of  a  man's  heart : — 
and  a  man's  heart  uas  given  to  it.  The 
■word  heart  in  the  Scriptures  often  has  a 
closer  relation  to  the  intellect  or  the  un- 
derstanding than  it  now  has  commonly 
with  us ;  and  here  perhaps  it  is  a  general 
term  to  denote  something  like  human  na- 
ti/re— thatis,  there  would 
be  as  great  a  change  in 
the  ciise  as  if  the  na- 
ture of  the  lion  should 
be  transformed  to  that 
of  a  man;  or,  the  mean- 
ing may  be  that  this 
mighty  empire,  carrying 
its  arms  with  the  ra- 
pidity of  an  eagle,  and 
the  fierceness  of  a  lion 
through  the  world,  would 
be  checked  in  its  career  ; 
its  ferocity  would  be 
tamed,  and  it  would  be 
iharacterized  by  compa- 
"ative  moderation   and   bum.anity.     The 


image  here  may  be  well  represented  bj 
the  preceding  cut.  It  is  indeed  an  im- 
age which  does  not  occur  in  nature,  but 
it  will,  therefore,  all  the  better  represent 
the  great  change  referred  to.  In  ch.  iv. 
16,  it  is  said  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  that  'his 
heart  should  be  changed  from  man's,  and 
a  beast's  heart  should  be  given  to  him;' 
here,  if  the  symbol  refers  to  him,  it  does 
not  refer  to  that  scene  of  humiliation  when 
he  was  compelled  to  eat  grass  like  a  beast, 
but  to  the  fact  that  he  was  brought  to 
look  at  things  as  a  man  should  do;  he 
ceased  to  act  like  a  ravenous  beast,  and 
was  led  to  calm  reflection,  and  to  think 
and  speak  like  a  man — a  rational  being. 
Or,  if  it  refers  to  the  empire  of  Babylon, 
instead  of  the  monarch,  it  would  mean 
that  a  change  had  come  over  the  nation 
under  the  succession  of  princes,  so  that 
the  fierceness  and  ferocity  of  the  first 
princes  of  the  empire  had  ceased,  and  the 
nation  had  not  only  closed  its  conquests, 
but  had  actually  become,  to  some  extent^ 
moderate  and  national. 

Now,  in  regard  to  the  application  of 
this  sj-mbol,  there  can  be  but  little  difii- 
culty,  and  there  is  almost  no  difference  of 
opinion  among  expositors.  All,  or  nearly 
all,  agree  that  it  refers  to  the  kingdom  of 
Babylon,  of  which  Nebuchadnezzar  was 
the  head,  and  to  the  gradual  diminution 
of  the  ferocity  of  conquest  under  a  suc- 
cession of  comparatively  weak  princes. 
Whatever  view  may  be  taken  of  the  Book 
of  Daniel — whether  it  be  regarded  as  in- 
spired prophecy  composed  by  Daniel  him- 
self, and  written  at  the  time  when  it 
professes  to  have  been,  or  whether  it  bo 
supposed  to  have  been  written  long  af- 
ter his  time  by  some  one  who  forged  it 
in  his  name,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
it  relates  to  the  head  of  the  Babylonian 
empire,  or  to  that  to  which  the  'head  of 
gold,'  in  the  image  referred  to  in  ch.  ii., 
represents.  The  circumstances  all  so  well 
agree  with  that  application  that,  although 
in  the  explication  of  the  dream  (vs.  16 — 
27)  this  part  of  it  is  not  explained— for 
the  perplexity  of  Daniel  related  particu 
larly  to  the  fourth  beast  (ver.  19),  yei 
there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  as  to 
what  was  intended.  For  (a)  the  lion — 
the  king  of  beasts — would  accurately  sym- 
bolize that  kingdom  in  the  days  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar— a  kingdom  occupying  tLe 
same  position  among  other  kingdoms 
which  the  lion  does  among  other  beasts, 
and   well  represented   in  its  power  and 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER    Vir. 


291 


5  And   behold  another  » beast,  a 
second,  like  to  a  bear,  and  it  raised 

ferocity  by  the  lion.  See  the  character 
and  position  of  this  kingdom  fully  illus- 
trated in  the  Notes  on  ch.  ii.  37,  38. 
(6)  The  eagles'  ivings  would  accurately 
denote  the  rapid  conquests  of  that  king- 
dom— its  leaving,  as  it  were,  its  own  na- 
tive domain,  and  flying  abroad.  The  lion 
alone  would  have  represented  the  char- 
acter of  the  kingdom  considered  as  already 
having  spread  itself,  or  as  being  at  the 
head  of  other  kingdoms  ;  the  wings  of 
the  cjgle,  the  rapidity  with  which  the 
arms  of  the  Babylonians  were  carried  into 
Palestine,  Egypt,  Ass3'ria,  &c.  It  is  true 
that  til  is  symbol  alone  would  not  desig- 
nate Babylon  any  more  than  it  would  the 
conquests  of  Cyrus,  or  Alexander,  or 
Caesar,  but  it  is  to  be  taken  in  the  con- 
nection in  which  it  is  here  found,  and 
no  one  can  doubt  that  it  has  a  striking 
applicability  to  Babylon,  (c)  The  clip- 
ping or  plucking  of  these  wings  would 
denote  the  cessation  of  conquest;  as  if 
it  would  extend  no  farther;  that  is,  we 
see  a  nation  once  distinguished  for  the 
invasion  of  other  nations,  now  ceasing 
its  conquests ;  and  remarkable,  not  for 
its  victories,  but  as  standing  at  the  head  of 
all  other  nations  as  the  lion  stands  among 
the  beasts  of  the  forest.  All  who  are 
acquainted  with  history  know  that,  af- 
ter the  conquests  of  that  kingdom  under 
Nebuchadnezzar,  it  ceased  characteristi- 
cally to  bo  a  kingdom  distinguished  for 
conquest,  but  that,  though  under  his  suc- 
cessors, it  held  a  pre-eminence  or  head- 
ship among  the  nations,  yet  that  its  vic- 
tories were  extended  no  farther.  The 
successors  of  Nebuchadnezzar  were  com- 
paratively weak  and  indolent  princes — 
as  if  the  wings  of  the  monster  had  been 
plucked,  (c?)  The  rising  up  of  the  lion 
on  the  feet,  and  standing  on  the  feet  as  a 
man,  would  denote,  not  inappropriately, 
the  change  of  the  kingdom  under  the  suc- 
cessors of  Nebuchadnezzar.  See  above  in 
the  explanation  of  the  symbol,  (e)  The 
giving  of  a  man's  heart  to  it  would  not 
be  inapplicable  to  the  change  produced  in 
the  empire  after  the  time  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, and  under  a  succession  of  com- 
paratively weak  and  inelEcient  princes. 
Instead  of  the  heart  of  the  lion — of  being 
lion-hearted' — it  had  the  heart  of  a  man ; 


up  ^  itself  on  one  side,  and  it  had 

*c.  2.  39.  •'or,  one  dominion. 


that  is,  the  character  of  wildness  and 
fierceness  denoted  by  an  untamed  beast 
was  succeeded  by  that  which  would  bo 
better  represented  by  a  human  being.  It 
is  not  the  character  of  the  lion  changed 
to  that  of  the  bear,  or  the  panther,  or  the 
leopard  ;  nor  is  it  man  considered  as  a 
warrior  or  conqueror,  but  man  as  he  is 
distinguished  from  the  wild  and  ferocious 
beast  of  the  desert.  The  change  in  the 
character  of  the  empire,  until  it  ceased 
under  the  feeble  reign  of  Belshazzar, 
would  be  well  denoted  by  this  symbol. 

5.  And  behold  another  heast,  a  second, 
like  to  a  been:  That  is,  after  the  lion  had 
appeared,  and  he  had  watched  it  until  it 
had  undergone  these  surprising  transfor- 
mations. There  are  several  circum- 
stances, also,  in  regard  to  this  symbol, 
all  of  which,  it  is  to  be  supposed  were 
significant,  and  all  of  which  demand  ex- 
plication before  it  is  attempted  to  apply 
them.  In  regard  to  this  symbol,  also,  it 
may  aid  in  the  explanation  to  have  a  cut 
that  shall  represent  it. 


(a)  The  animal  seen  : — the  bear.  For 
a  full  description  of  the  bear,  see  Bochart, 
Hieroz.  Lib.  iii.  c.  ix.  The  animal  is 
well-known,  and  has  properties  quite  dis- 
tinct from  the  lion  and  other  animals. 
There  was  doubtless  some  reason  why 
this  symbol  was  emplo}'ed  to  denote  a 
particular  kingdom,  and  there  was  some- 
thing in  the  kingdom  that  corresponded 
with  these  peculiar  properties,  as  there 
was  in  the  case  of  the  lion.  The 
bear  might,  in  some  respects,  have 
been  a  proper  representative  of  Baby- 
lon, but  it  would  not  in  all  nor  in  the 
main  respects.  According  to  Bochart 
(Hieroz.  vol.  i.  p.  812),  the  bear  is  dis- 
tinguished mainly  for  two  things,  cun- 
ning and  ferocity.  Aristotle  says  that 
the  bear  is  greedy  as  well  as  silly  and 
foolhardy.  (Wemyss,  key  to  the  symbolic 
language    of   Scripture.)     The  name    in 


292 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555 


three  ribs  in  the  mouth  of  it  be- 
tween the  teeth  of  it :  and  they  said 

Hebrew  is  taken  from  bis  grumbling  or 
growling.     Comp.  Isa.  lis.  11 : 
'•  'Wo  roar  all  like  tears." 
Comp.  Horace,  Epocl.  16,  51. 

Nee  Vespertinus  circumgemit  Ursus  oTile. 
Virgil  mentions  their  ferocity  : 

Atque  in  prwsepibus  ursi 
Saevire.  Mn.  vii.  17. 

The  bear  is  noted  as  especially  fierce 
when  hungry,  or  when  robbed  of  its 
whelps.  Jerome  (on  Hos.  iii.  13,)  re- 
marks, '  It  is  said  by  those  who  have 
studied  the  nature  of  wild  beasts,  that 
none  among  them  is  more  ferocious  than 
the  bear  when  deprived  of  its  young, 
or  when  hungry.'  Comp.  2  Sam.  svii.  8; 
Prov.  xvii.  12;  Hos.  xiii.  8.  The  cha- 
racteristics of  the  kingdom,  therefore, 
that  would  be  denoted  by  the  bear,  would 
be  ferocity,  roughness,  fierceness  in  war — 
especially  when  provoked ;  a  spirit  less 
manly  and  noble  than  that  denoted  by 
the  lion  ;  severe  in  its  treatment  of  ene- 
mies, with  a  mixture  of  fierce  and  sav- 
age cunning. 

(h)  Its  rising  up  on  one  of  its  sides: — 
and  it  raised  vp  itself  on  one  side.  The 
Chaldee  word  here  used — "\'L^t^' — occurs 
nowhere  else.  It  means  side  (Gesenius), 
and  would  be  applied  here  to  the  side  of 
an  animal^as  if  he  lifted  up  one  side 
before  the  other  when  he  rose.  The 
Latin  Vulgate  renders  it,  in  jmrte  stetit. 
The  Greek  (Walton),  ti'j  /jfpoj  tv  iarair] — 
'it  stood  on  one  part;'  or,  as  Thompson 
fenders  it,  'he  stood  half  erect.'  The 
Codex  Chisi. — im  tOv  ltd;  7r\cvpdv  ccrTaSri 
'it  stood  upon  one  side.'  Maurer  renders 
this,  'on  one  of  its  forefeet  it  was  re- 
cumbent, and  stood  on  the  other,'  and 
says  that  this  is  the  figure  exhibited  on 
one  of  the  stones  found  in  Babylon,  an 
engraving  of  which  may  be  seen  in  Miin- 
ter,  Religion  d.  Babyl.  p.  112.  The  ani- 
mal referred  to  here,  as  found  in  Babylon, 
says  Lengerke,  '  lies  kneeling  on  the 
right  forefoot,  and  is  in  the  act  of  rising 
on  tlie  left  foot.'  Bertholdt  and  Htiver- 
nick  understand  this  .ts  meaning  that  the 
animal  stood  on  the  hiudfeet,  with  the 
forepart  raised,  as  the  bear  is  said  to  do; 
but  probably  the  true  position  is  that  re- 
ferred to  by  Maurer  and  Lengerke,  that 


thus  unto  it,  Arise,   devour  much 
flesh. 


the  animal  was  in  the  act  of  raising  itself 
up  from  a  recumbent  posture,  and  rested 
on  one  of  its  forefeet  while  the  other  waa 
reached  out,  and  the  body  on  that  side 
was  partially  raised.  This  jjosition  would 
naturally  denote  a  kingdom  that  had  been 
quiet  and  at  rest,  but  that  was  now  rous- 
ing itself  deliberately  for  some  purpose, 
as  of  conquest  or  war — as  the  bear  that 
had  been  couching  down  would  rise  when 
hungry,  or  when  going  forth  for  prey. 

(c)  The  ribs  in  its  mouth  : — and  it  had 
three  ribs  in  the  month  of  it  between  the 
teeth  of  it.  Bertholdt  understands  this 
of  fangs  or  tusks — or  fangs  crooked  or 
bent  like  ribs,  p.  451.  But  the  proper 
meaning  of  the  Chaldee  'j!^;.'  is  the  same 
as  the  Hebrew  ]3^^ — a  rib.  (Gesenius.) 
The  Latin  Vulgate  is  tres  ordines — three 
rows;  the  Sj'riac  and  the  Greek,  three 
ribs.  This  would  be  sufficiently  charac- 
teristic of  a  bear,  and  the  attitude  of  the 
animal  here  seems  to  be,  that  it  had  killed 
some  other  animal,  and  had,  in  devour- 
ing it,  torn  out  three  ribs  from  its  side, 
and  now  held  them  in  its  mouth.  It  was 
slowly  rising  from  a  recumbent  posture 
with  these  ribs  in  its  mouth,  and  about 
to  receive  a  command  to  go  forth  and 
devour  much  flesh.  The  number  three, 
in  this  place,  Lengerke  supposes  to  be 
a  round  number,  without  any  special  sig- 
nificancy  ;  others  suppose  that  it  denotes 
the  number  of  nations  or  kingdoms  which 
the  people  here  represented  by  the  bear 
had  overcome.  Perhaps  this  latter  would 
be  the  more  obvious  idea  as  suggested 
by  the  symbol,  but  it  is  not  necessary  in 
order  to  a  proper  understanding  of  a  sym- 
bol to  press  such  a  point  too  closely. 
The  natural  idea  which  would  be  sug- 
gested by  this  part  of  the  symbol  would 
be  that  of  a  kingdom  or  people  of  a  fierce 
and  rough  character  having  already  sub- 
dued others,  and  then,  after  reposing, 
rising  up  with  the  trophies  of  its  former 
conquests  to  go  forth  to  new  victories,  or 
to  overcome  others.  The  symbol  would 
be  a  very  striking  one  to  represent  a 
concjuering  nation  in  such  a  posture. 

(rf)  The  commnnd  given  to  this  beast : — ■ 
and  they  said  thus  unto  it,  Arise,  devour 
much  flesh.  That  is,  it  was  said  to  it;  or 
some  one  having  authority  said  it.  A 
voice  was  heard   commanding   it  to   gfl 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER    VII. 


293 


forth  and  devour.  This  command  is 
wholly  in  accordance  with  the  nature  of 
the  bear.  The  bear  is  called  by  Aristotle 
aapKoipaywv — flesh-cater,  and  ^wov  Traji'Payov 
- — a  beast  dcvotirinrj  everything  (Hist.  Nat. 
viii.  5),  and  no  better  description  could 
be  given  of  it.  As  a  symbol,  this  would 
properly  be  applicable  to  a  nation,  about 
receiving,  as  it  were,  a  command  from 
God  to  go  forth  to  wider  conquests  than 
it  had  already  made ;  to  arouse  itself 
from  its  repose  and  to  achieve  now 
triumphs. 

The  application  of  this  symbol  was  not 
explained  by  the  angel  to  Daniel ;  but  if 
the  former  appertained  to  Babylon,  there 
can  be  little  difficulty  in  understanding 
to  what  this  is  to  be  applied.  It  is  evi- 
dently to  that  which  succeeded  the  Bab}'- 
lonian — the  Medo-Persian,  the  kingdom 
ruled  successively  by  Cyrus,  Cambyses, 
Smerdis,  Darius,  Xerxes,  Artaxerxes,  and 
Darius  Nothus,  until  it  was  overthrown 
by  Alexander  the  Great.  The  only  en- 
quiry now  is,  as  to  the  pertinency  of  the 
S3'mbol  here  employed  to  represent  this 
kingdom. 

(a)  The  symbol  of  the  boar.  As 
already  seen,  the  bear  would  denote  any 
fierce,  rough,  overbearing,  and  arbitrary 
kingdom,  and  it  is  clear  that  while  it 
mighthAXQ  applicability  to  any  such  king- 
dom, it  would  better  represent  that  of 
Medo-Persia  than  the  lion  would — for 
while,  in  some  respects,  either  symbol 
would  be  applicable  to  cither  nation,  the 
Medo-Persian  did  not  stand  so  decidedly 
at  the  head  of  nations  as  the  Babylonian. 
As  to  its  character,  however,  the  bear  was 
not  an  inappropriate  symbol.  Taking 
the  whole  nation  together,  it  was  fierce 
and  rough,  and  unpolished,  little  disposed 
to  friendliness  with  the  nations,  and  dis- 
satisfied while  any  around  it  had  peace 
or  prosperity.  In  the  image  seen  in 
ch.  ii.,  this  kingdom,  denoted  by  the  breast 
and  arms  of  silver  (ver.  32),  is  described 
in  the  explanation  (ver.  39)  as  'inferior 
to  thee ;'  that  is,  to  Nebuchadnezzar. 
For  a  sufficiently  full  account  of  this 
kingdom — of  the  mad  projects  of  Cam- 
byses, and  his  savage  rage  against  the 
Ethiopians — well  represented  by  the  fero- 
city of  the  bear;  of  the  ill-starred  expe- 
dition to  Greece  under  Xerxes — an  expe- 
dition in  its  fierceness  and  folly  well 
represented  by  the  bear,  and  of  the  de- 
generacy of  the  national  character  after 
Xerxes — well  represented    by   the   bear 


aa  compared  with  the  lion,  see  Notes 
on  ch.  ii.  39.  No  one  acquainted  with 
the  history  of  that  nation  can  doubt  tho 
propriety  and  applicability  of  the  emblem. 

(6)  The  rising  up  on  its  side — or  from 
a  recumbent  posture,  as  if  it  had  been  in 
a  state  of  repose,  and  was  now  arousing 
itself  for  action.  Different  interpreta- 
tions have  been  adopted  of  this  emblem 
as  applicable  to  the  Medo-Persians.  The 
ancient  Hebrew  interpreters,  as  Jerome 
remarks,  explain  it  as  meaning  that  that 
kingdom  was  'on  one  side'  in  the  sense 
of  separate;  that  is,  that  this  kingdom 
kept  itself  aloof  from  Judea,  or  did  not 
inflict  injury  on  it.  Thus  also  Grotius  ex- 
plains it  as  meaning  that  it  did  not  injure 
Judea — Jude£B  nihil  nocuit.  Ephrene, 
the  Syrian,  and  Theodorit,  explain  it  as 
meaning  that  the  empire  of  the  Medo- 
Persians  was  situated  on  the  side  of 
Judea,  or  held  itself  within  its  proper 
bounds,  in  the  sense  that  it  never  ex- 
tended its  dominion  like  Babylon  over 
the  whole  earth.  Rosenmiiller  explains 
it  as  meaning  that  in  relation  to  the 
kingdom  represented  by  tho  lion,  it  was 
at  its  side,  both  occupying  the  regions  of 
the  East.  J.  D.  Michalis  understands 
it  as  denoting  that,  as  the  bear  was  rais- 
ing itself  up,  one  part  being  more  raised 
than  the  other,  the  Medo-Persian  empire 
was  composed  of  two  kingdoms,  one  of 
which  was  more  exalted  or  advanced 
than  the  other.  Comp.  Lengerke.  The 
true  meaning,  however,  is  that,  as  seen 
by  Daniel,  the  nation  that  had  been  in  a 
state  of  repose  was  now  preparing  itself 
for  new  conquests — a  state  descriptive  in 
every  way  quite  applicable  to  the  condition 
of  the  Medo-Persian  empire,  after  the 
conquests  by  Cyrus,  as  he  overran  the 
kingdom  of  Lydia,  <fcc.,  then  reposing, 
and  now  about  arousing  to  the  conquest 
and  subjugation  of  Babylon.  The  pre- 
cise time,  therefore,  indicated  would  be 
about  B.  C.  544  {Calmet),  when  having 
overcome  the  Medes,  and  having  secured 
the  conquest  of  Lydia,  and  the  dethrone- 
ment of  Croesus,  he  is  meditating  the 
destruction  of  Babylon.  This  interval 
of  repose  lasted  about  .a  year,  and  it  is 
this  time  that  the  united  empire  is  seen, 
under  the  image  of  tho  bear  rising  on  its 
side,  arousing  itself  to  go  forth  to  new 
conquests. 

(c)  The  ribs  in  the  mouth  of  the  beast. 
This,  as  above  remarked,  would  properly 
refer  to  some  previous   conquest — as  a 


294  DANIEL.  [B,  C.  555 

6  After  this  I  beheld,  and  lo  an-  other,   like   a  leopard,   -which   had 


bear  appearing  in  that  manner  would  in- 
dicate that  some  other  animal  had  been 
overcome  and  slain  by  him,  and  torn  in 
pieces.  The  emblem  would  be  fulfilled 
if  the  power  here  symbolized  had  been 
successful  in  former  wars,  and  had  rent 
kingdoms  or  people  asunder.  That  this 
description  would  apply  to  the  Medo- 
Persian  power  before  its  attack  on  Baby- 
lon, or  before  extending  its  dominion 
over  Bab3'lon,  and  its  establishment  as 
the  Medo-Persian  kingdom,  no  one  can 
doubt.  Comp.  the  Kotes  on  ch.  ii.  39. 
It  has  been  commonly  supposed  that 
Cyrus  succeeded  to  the  throne  of  Media 
without  war.  But  this  is  far  from  being 
the  case — though  so  represented  in  what 
may  be  regarded  as  the  romance  of  the 
Cyropoedia.  In  the  Anabasis  of  Xeno- 
phon,  however,  the  fact  of  his  having 
subdued  Media  by  arms,  is  distinctly 
admitted,  iii.  4,  7, 12.  Herodotus,  Ctesias, 
Isocratesj.and  Strabo,  all  agree  also  in  the 
fact  that  it  was  so.  The  Upper  Tigris 
was  the  seat  of  one  campaign,  where  the 
cities  of  Larissa  and  Mespila  were  taken 
by  Cyrus.  From  Strabo  we  learn  that 
the  decisive  battle  was  fought  on  the  spot 
where  Cyrus  afterwards  built  Pasar- 
garda;,  in  Persia,  for  his  capital.  See 
Kitto,  C3'clo.  Art.  Cyrus.  In  addition  to 
this,  we  are  to  remember  the  well-known 
conquests  of  Cyrus,  in  Lydia  and  else- 
where, and  the  propriety  of  the  emblem 
will  be  apparent.  It  may  not  be  certain 
that  the  number  three  is  significant  in 
the  emblem,  but  it  is  j^ossiLle  that  there 
may  have  been  reference  to  the  three 
kingdoms  of  Persia,  Media,  and  Lydia, 
that  were  actually  under  the  dominion 
of  Cyrus  when  tlie  aggressive  movement 
was  made  on  Babylon.  I 

(d)  The  command  to  '  arise  and  devour  ' 
much  flesh.'     No  one  can  fail  to  see  the 
appropriateness    of    this,  considered    as ' 
addressed  to  the  Medo-Persian  power— ! 
that    power    which    subdued    Babylon ; 
which  brought  under  its  dominion  a  con- 
siderable part  of  the  world,  and  which, 
under  Darius  and  Xer.\es,  poured  its  mil-  ' 
lions  on  Greece.     The  emblem  here  used 
is,  therefore,  one  of  the  most  striking  and 
appropriate  that  could  be  employed,  and 
\t  cannot  be  doubted  that  it  had  reference  ' 
to  this  kingdom,  and  that,  in  all  the  par-  j 
ticulars,  there  was  a  clear  fulfillment. 


6.  After  this  I  beheld,  and  lo  another, 
like  a  leopard.  That  is,  as  before,  after 
the  bear  had  appeared — in  indicating  tha^ 
this  was  to  be  a  succeeding  kingdom  or 
power.  The  beast  which  now  appeared 
was  a  monster,  and,  as  in  the  former 
cases,  so  in  regard  to  this,  there  are 
several  circumstances  which  demand  ex- 
planation in  order  to  understand  the 
symbol.  It  may  assist  us,  perhaps,  in 
forming  a  correct  idea  of  the  symbol  here 
introduced  to  h.avc  before  us  a  represen- 
tation of  the  animal  as  it  appeared  to 
Daniel.  The  following  cut  will  furnish  a 
sufficiently  correct  representation. 


(rt)  The  animal  itself: — a  leopard.  The 
word  here  used — in: — or  in  Heb.  "m:;  — 
denotes  a  panther  or  leopard,  so  called 
from  his  spots.  This  is  a  well  known  beast 
of  prey,  distinguished  for  blood-thirsti- 
ness and  cruelty,  and  these  characteris- 
tics are  especially  applicable  to  the  female 
panther.  The  animal  is  referred  to  in  the 
Scriptures  as  emblematic  of  the  following 
things,  or  as  having  the  following  charac- 
teristics :  (1)  As  next  in  dignity  to  the 
lion — of  the  same  general  nature.  Comp, 
Bochart,  Hieroz.  P.  I.  Lib.  iii.  c.  vii. 
Thus  the  lion  and  the  panther,  or  leopard, 
are  often  united  in  the  Scriptures.  Comp. 
Jer.  V.  C,  Hos.  xiii.  7.  See  also  in  the 
Apocrypha,  Ecclesias.  xxviii.  23.  So  also 
they  are  united  in  Homer,  H.  p. 

Ovre  (ivf  nap6a\iOi  Toacov  iiet>6s,ovTC  Xtoi/rof. 

'Neither  had  the  leopard  nor  the  lion 
such  strength.'  (2)  As  distinguished  for 
cruelty,  or  a  fierce  nature,  as  contrasted 
with  the  gentle  and  tame  animals.  Isa. 
xi.  6,  "And  the  leopard  shall  lie  down 
with  the  kid."  In  Jer.  v.  6,  it  is  com- 
pared with  the  lion  .and  the  wolf:  "A 
lion  out  of  the  forest  shall  slay  them,  and 
a  wolf  of  the  evening  shall  spoil  them,  a 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER  VII 


295 


upon  the  back  of  it  four  wings  of  a 

»c.  8.  8,  22. 

leopard  shall  watch  over  their  cities." 
Comp.  IIos.  xiii.  7.  (3)  As  distinguished 
for  swiftness  or  fleetness.  Habak.  i.  8 : 
"  Their  horses  are  swifter  than  the  leop- 
ards." Comp.  also  the  quotations  from 
the  classics  in  Bochart  as  above,  p. 
788.  His  fleetness  is  often  referred  to ; 
the  celerity  of  his  sprint/  or  bound  espe- 
cially, by  the  Greek  and  Roman  writers. 
(4)  As  insidious,  or  as  Ijing  in  wait  and 
springing  unexpectedly  upon  the  unwary 
traveller.  Comp.  Hos.  xiii.  7 :  "As  a 
leopard  by  the  way  will  I  observe  them  ;" 
that  is,  I  will  icatch — iirx — them.  So 
Pliny  says  of  leopards  :  Insidxmt  pardi 
condensa  arborum,  occultatique  eanim  ra- 
mia  in  prcetereuntia  desilinnt.  (5)  They 
are  characterized  by  their  spots.  In  the 
general  nature  of  the  animal  there  is  a 
strong  resemblance  to  the  lion.  Thus, 
an  Arabic  writer  quoted  by  Bochart,  de- 
fines the  leopard  to  be  '  an  animal  resem- 
bling the  lion,  except  that  it  is  smaller, 
and  has  a  skin  marked  by  black  spots.' 
The  proper  idea  in  this  representation, 
when  used  as  a  symbol,  would  be  of  a  nation 
or  kingdom  that  would  have  more  noble- 
ness than  the  one  represented  by  the  bear, 
but  a  less  decisive  headship  over  others 
than  that  represented  by  the  lion ;  a  na- 
tion that  was  addicted  to  conquest,  or 
that  preyed  upon  others  ;  a  nation  rapid 
in  its  movements,  and  springing  upon 
others  unawares,  and  perhap)sm  its  spots 
denoting  a  nation  or  people  made  up,  not 
of  homogeneous  elements,  but  of  various 
different  people.  See  below  in  the  appli- 
cation of  this. 

(6)  The  four  wings: — which  had  upon 
the  back  of  it  four  tciugs  of  a  fowl.  The 
first  beast  was  seen  with  the  wings  of  an 
eagle,  but  without  any  specified  number  ; 
this  appears  with  wings,  but  without  spe- 
cifj'ing  any  particular  kind  of  wings, 
though  the  number  is  mentioned.  In  both 
of  them  celerity  of  movement  is  undoubt- 
edly intended — celerity  bej'ond  what 
would  be  properly  denoted  by  the  animal 
itself — the  lion  or  the  leopard.  If  there 
is  a  difference  in  the  design  of  the  repre-  I 
sentation,  as  tiiere  would  seem  to  be  by 
mentioning  the  kind  of  wings  in  the  one 
caae,  and  the  number  in  the  other,  it  is 
probable  that  the  former  would  denote  a 
Hore  bold  and  extended  flight ;  the  latter 


foTvl;  the  beast  had  also  four » heads; 
and  dominion  was  given  to  it. 

a  flight  more  rapid,  denoted  by  the  four 
wings.  We  should  look  for  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  former  in  a  nation  that  ex- 
tended its  conquests  over  a  broader  space  ; 
in  the  latter,  to  a  nation  that  moved  with 
more  celerity.  But  there  is  some  dan- 
ger of  pressing  these  similitudes  too  far. 
Nothing  is  said  in  the  passage  about  the 
arrangement  of  the  wings,  except  that 
they  were  on  the  back  of  the  animal.  It 
is  to  be  supposed  that  there  were  two  on 
each  side. 

(c)  The  four  heads: — the  beast  had  also 
four  heads.  This  representation  must 
have  been  designed  to  signify  either  that 
the  one  power  or  kingdom  denoted  by 
the  leopard  was  composed  of  four  sepa- 
rate powers  or  nations  now  united  in  one  ; 
or  that  there  were  four  successive  kings 
or  dynasties  that  made  up  its  history; 
or  that  the  power  or  kingdom  actually  ap- 
peared, as  seen  in  its  prevailing  character- 
istic, as  a  distinct  dominion,  as  having  four 
heads,  or  as  being  divided  into  so  many 
separate  sovereignties.  It  seems  to  me 
that  either  one  of  these  would  be  a  pro- 
per and  natural  fulfilment  of  the  design 
of  the  image,  though  the  second  sug- 
gested would  be  less  proper  than  either 
of  the  others,  as  the  heads  appeared  on 
the  animal  not  in  succession — as  the  lit- 
tle horn  sprung  up  in  the  midst  of  the 
other  ten,  as  represented  in  the  fourth 
beast — but  existed  simultaneously.  The 
general  idea  would  be,  that  in  some  way 
the  one  particular  sovereignty  had  four 
sources  of  power  blended  into  one,  or 
actually  exerted  the  same  kind  of  do- 
minion, and  constituted,  in  fact,  the  one 
kingdom  as  distinguished  from  the  others. 

(d)  The  dominion  given  to  it : — and 
dominion  was  given  to  it.  That  is,  it  was 
appointed  to  rule  where  the  former  bad 
ruled,  and  until  it  should  be  succeeded 
by  another — the  beast  with  the  ten 
horns. 

In  regard  to  the  application  of  this, 
though  the  angel  did  not  explain  it  t< 
Daniel,  except  in  general  that  a  kingdom 
was  represented  by  it  (ver.  17),  it  would 
seem  that  there  could  be  little  difiiculty, 
though  there  has  been  some  variety  in  the 
views  entertained.  Maurer,  Lengerke, 
and  some  others,  refer  it  to  the  Medo- 
Persian  empire — supposing  that  the  se. 


296 


DANIEL. 


[B.  0,  555. 


cond  symbol  referred  to  the  kingdom  of 
Media.  But  the  objections  to  this  are  so 
obvious,  and  so  numerous,  that  it  seems 
to  me  the  opinion  cannot  be  entertained  ; 
for  (1)  the  kingdom  of  Media  did  not,  in 
any  proper  sense,  succeed  that  of  Baby- 
lon ;  (2)  the  representation  of  the  bear 
•with  three  ribs  has  no  proper  applica- 
bility to  Media;  (3)  the  whole  descrip- 
tion, as  Vie  have  seen  above,  of  the 
second  beast,  accords  entirely  with  the 
history  of  the  Medo-Persian  empire.  If 
this  be  so,  then  we  naturally  look  for  the 
fulfilment  of  this  symbol — the  third  head 
— in  the  kingdom  or  dynasty  that  fol- 
lowed directly  that  of  Medo-Persia — the 
Macedonian  dj-nasty  or  kingdom  founded 
by  Alexander  the  Great,  extending  over 
the  same  countries  before  occupied  by 
Babylon  and  the  Medo-Persian  empire, 
and  continuing  till  it  was  swallowed  up 
in  the  conquests  of  Rome.  We  shall  find 
that  all  the  circumstances  agree  with  this 
supposition : 

(o)  The  animal — the  leopard.  The 
comparative  nobleness  of  the  animal ;  a 
beast  of  prey ;  the  celerity  of  its  move- 
ments ;  the  spring  or  bound  with  which 
it  leaps  upon  its  prej%  all  agree  well  with 
the  kingdom  of  which  Alexander  was 
the  founder.  Indeed  there  was  no  other 
kingdom  among  the  ancients  to  which 
it  could  be  better  applied  ;  and  it  will  be 
admitted  that,  on  the  supposition  that  it 
was  the  design  of  Daniel  to  choose  a  sym- 
bol that  would  represent  the  Macedonian 
empire,  he  could  not  have  selected  one 
that  was  better  adapted  to  it  than  the 
leopard.  All  the  characteristics  of  the 
animal  that  have  been  noticed — (I)  as 
next  in  dignity  to  the  lion;  (2)  as  distin- 
guished for  a  fierce  nature  ;  (3)  as  charac- 
terized by  fleetness;  (4)  as  known  for 
lying  in  wait,  and  springing  suddenly 
upon  its  prey ;  and  (5)  in  the  point  to  be  no- 
ticed soon — their  spots — all  agree  with 
the  characteristics  of  Alexander,  and  his 
movements  among  the  nations,  and  with 
the  kingdom  that  was  founded  by  him  in 
the  East,  (b)  The  four  wings.  These 
represent  well  the  rapidity  of  the  con- 
quests of  Alexander,  for  no  more  rapid 
conquests  were  ever  made  than  were  his 
in  the  East.  It  was  noticed  that  the 
leopard  had  four  wings,  as  contrasted 
with  the  first  beast,  in  reference  to  which 
the  number  is  not  mentioned;  the  one  de- 
noting a  broader  ilight,  and  the  other  a 
more  rapid  one ;  and  the  one  agrees  well 


[with  the  conquests  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
and  the  other  with  those  of  Alexander 
((■)  The  four  heads  united  to  one  body. 

I  It  is  well  known  that  when  Alexandel 
died,  his  empire  was  left  to  four  of  his 
generals,  and  that  they  came  to  be  at  tha 
head  of  as  many  distinct  dominions,  yet 
all  springing  from  the  same  source,  and 
all,  in  fact,  but  the  Macedonian  empire. 
This  fact  would  not  be  so  well  represented 
by  four  distinct  and  separate  animals  as 
by  otie  animal  with  four  heads  ;  that  is, 
as  the  head  represents  authority  or  do- 
minion, one  empire  in  fact  now  ruling  by 
four  distinct  authorities.  The  one  empire 
considered  as  Macedonian  continued  its 
sway  till  it  was  swallowed  up  by  the  Ro- 
mans ;  that  is,  the  Macedonian  power  or 
dominion  as  distinct  from  that  of  Bab}'- 
lon  or  Medo-Persia;  as  having  charac- 
teristics vnlike  these;  as  introducing  a 
new  order  of  things,  continued,  though 
that  power  was  broken  up  and  exercised 
under  distinct  manifestations  of  sove- 
reignty. The  fact  was,  that,  at  the  death 
of  Alexander,  to  whom  the  founding  of 
this  empire  was  owing,  "  Philip  Aridasus, 
brother  of  Alexander,  and  his  infant  son 
by  Roxana,  were  appointed  by  the  gen- 
erals of  the  army  to  succeed,  and  Perdic- 
cas  was  made  regent.  The  empire  was 
divided  into  thirty-three  governments, 
distributed  among  as  many  general  offi- 
cers. Hence  arose  a  series  of  bloody, 
desolating  wars,  and  a  period  of  confu- 
sion, anarchy  and  crime  ensued,  that  is 
almost  without  a  parallel  in  the  history 
of  the  world.  After  the  battle  of  Ipsus,  301 
B.  C,  in  which  Antigonus  was  defeated, 
the  empire  was  divided  into  four  king- 
doms— Thrace  and  Bythinia  under  Lysi- 
machus;  Sj'ria  and  the  East  under  Seleu- 
eus ;  Egypt  under  Ptolemy  Soter,  and 
Macedonia  under  Cassandar."  Lyman, 
Hist.  Chart.  It  was  these  four  powers, 
thus  springing  out  of  the  one  empire 
founded  by  Alexander,  that  was  clearly 
represented  by  the  four  heads,  (d)  The 
dominion  given  to  it.  No  one  can  doubt 
that  a  dominion  was  given  to  Alexander 
and  the  Macedonian  dynasty,  which  would 
fully  correspond  with  this.  In  fact  the 
dominion  of  the  world  was  practically 
conceded  to  that  kingdom,  (e)  There  ia 
only  one  other  circumstance  to  be  noticed, 
though  perhaps  we  are  not  to  seek  an  ex- 
act accomplishment  for  that  in  any  spe- 
cific  events.  It  is  the  fact  that  the  leop- 
ard is  marked  by  spots — a  circumstance 


B.  C,  555.] 


CHAPTER   VII, 


297 


7  After  thia  1  iaw  in  the  night  ]  dreadful   and   terrible,   and   strong 
visions,  and  behold  a  fourth  i beast,  .  ,„        ,„  „^ 

'  ac.  2.  40.  vcr.  19,  23. 


which  many  have  supposed  had  a  fulfil- 
ment in  the  fact  that  numerous  nations, 
not  homogeneous,  were  found  in  the  em- 
pire of  Alexander.  So  Bochart,  Hieroz. 
P.  i.  Lib.  iii.  c.  vii.  p.  789,  says:  'The 
spots  of  the  leopard  refer  to  the  different 
customs  of  the  nations  over  which  he 
ruled.  Among  these,  besides  the  Mace- 
donians, Greeks,  Thracians,  and  Illyrians, 
in  Europe,  there  were  in  Africa  the  Ly- 
bians,  Egyptians,  and  Troglodites ;  in 
Asia  almost  all  the  nations  to  the  Ganges.' 
But,  without  insisting  on  this,  no  one  can 
compare  the  other  particulars  which  were 
clearly  designed  to  he  symbolical,  with- 
ont  perceiving  that  they  had  a  full  ac- 
complishment in  the  Macedonian  em- 
pire. 

7,  8.  After  this  I  saio  in  the  night  vi- 
sioni.  The  other  beasts  were  seen  also 
in  a  dream  (ver.  1),  and  this  probably  in 
the  same  night,  though  as  a  subsequent 
part  of  the  dream,  for  the  whole  vision 
evidently  passed  before  the  prophet  in  a 
single  dream.  The  succession,  or  the 
fact  that  he  saw  one  after  the  other,  in- 
dicates a  succession  in  the  kingdoms. 
They  were  not  to  be  at  the  same  time 
upon  the  earth,  but  one  was  to  arise  after 
another  in  the  order  here  indicated, 
though  they  were  in  some  respects  to 
occupy  the  same  territory.  The  singular 
character  of  the  beast  that  now  appears  ; 
the  number  of  the  horns ;  the  springing 


up  of  a  new  horn ;  the  might  and  terror 
of  the  beast,  and  the  long  duration 
of  its  dominion  upon  the  earth,  at- 
tracted and  fixed  the  attention  of  Dan- 
iel, led  him  into  a  more  minute  explana- 
tion of  the  appearance  of  the  animal,  and 
induced  him  particularly  to  ask  an  ex- 
planation of  the  angel  of  the  meaning  of 
this  part  of  the  vision,  ver.  19.  *^  And 
behold  a  fourth  beast.  This  beast  had 
peculiar  characteristics,  all  of  which  were 
regarded  as  symbolical,  and  all  of  which 
demand  explanation  in  order  that  we 
may  have  a  just  view  of  the  nature  and 
design  of  the  symbol.  As  in  the  cases 
of  the  other  beasts,  so  in  this  we  may 
be  assisted  in  the  explanation  by  hav- 
ing before  us  a  cut  representing  in 
general  its  appearance.  It  is  indeed  in 
some  degree  imaginary,  for  we  are  not 
told  as  to  the  exact  appearance  of  the 
beast — whether  it  was  a  lion  or  some  other 
form,  but  it  is  sufficiently  accurate  to 
furnish  the  main  idea  in  the  vision.  The 
first  cut  represents  the  animal  as  he  first 
appeared  with  the  ten  horns ;  the  second 
as  he  may  have  appeared  with  another 
horn  springing  up  in  the  midst  of  them. 
As  in  reference  to  the  three  former 
beasts,  also,  so  in  regard  to  this,  it  will 
be  proper  to  explain  first  the  signi- 
ficance of  the  different  parts  of  the 
symbol,  and  then  in  the  exposition  (vs. 
19,  seq.)  to  inquire  into  the  application. 


The  particulars  of  this  symbol  are  more 
numerous,  more  striking,  and  more  im- 
portant than  in  either  of  the  previous 
ones.     These  particulars  are  the  foilow- 

'vBg,  TS.  7 11 


(a)  The  animal  itself,  (ver.  7) : — a 
fourth  beast,  dreadful  and  terrible,  and 
strong  exccedingli/.  The  form  or  nature 
of  the  beast  is  not  given  as  in  the  pre- 
ceding cases — the  lion,  the  bear,  and  the 


298 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555 


exceedingly  ;  and  it  had  great  iron 
teeth :  it  devoured  and  brake  in 
pieces,  and  stamped  the  residue  with 


leopard — but  it  is  left  for  the  imagination 
+0  fill  up.  It  was  a  beast  more  terrific 
in  its  appearance  than  either  of  the  others, 
and  was  evidently  a  monster  such  as 
could  not  be  designated  by  a  single  name. 
The  ternis  which  arc  used  here  in  de- 
scribing the  beast — dreadful,  terrible,  ex- 
ceedingly strong,  are  nearly  synonymous, 
and  are  heaped  together  in  order  to  give 
au  impressive  view  of  the  terror  inspired 
by  the  beast.  There  can  be  no  doubt  as 
to  the  general  meaniny  of  this,  for  it  is 
explained  (ver.  23,)  as  denoting  a  king- 
dom that  '  should  devour  the  whole 
earth,  and  tread  it  down,  and  break  it  in 
pieces.'  As  a  symbol,  it  would  denote 
some  power  much  more  fearful  and  much 
more  to  be  dreaded ;  having  a  wider 
dominion  ;  and  more  stern,  more  oppres- 
sive in  its  character,  more  severe  in  its 
exactions,  and  more  entirely  destroj'ing 
the  liberty  of  others ;  advancing  more 
by  power  and  terror,  and  less  by  art  and 
cunning,  than  either.  This  character- 
istic is  manifest  throughout  the  symbol. 

(6)  The  teeth  (ver.  7) : — and  ithad  tjreat 
iron  teeth.  Not  only  teeth  or  tusks,  such 
as  other  animals  may  have,  but  teeth 
made  oi  iron.  This  is  characteristic  of  a 
monster,  and  shows  that  there  was  to  be 
something  very  peculiar  in  the  dominion 
that  was  here  symbolized.  The  teeth  are 
of  use  to  eat  or  devour  ;  and  the  symbol 
here  is  that  of  devouring  or  rending — 
as  a  fierce  monster  with  such  teeth  might 
bo  supposed  to  rend  or  devour  all  that 
was  before  it.  This  too  would  denote  a 
nation  exceedingly  fierce ;  a  nation  of 
savage  ferocity ;  a  nation  that  would  be 
signally  formidable  to  all  others.  For 
illustration,  comp.  Jer.  xv.  12;  Micah 
iv.  13.  As  explained  in  ver.  23,  it  is  said 
that  the  kingdom  denoted  by  this  would 
devour  the  whole  earth.'  Teeth — great 
teeth,  are  often  used  as  the  symbols  of 
cruelty,  or  of  a  devouring  enemy.  Thus 
in  Prov.  xxx.  14,  "There  is  a  generation 
whose  teeth  are  as  swords,  and  their  jaw 
*eeth  are  as  knives,  to  devour  the  poor 
from  otF  the  earth,  and  the  needy  from 
among  men."  So  David  uses  the  word 
^o  denote  the  cruelty  of  tyrants  :  Ps.  iii.  7. 
•'  Thou  hast  broken  the  teeth  of  the  un- 


the  feet  of  it:  and  it  was  diverse 
from  all  the  beasts  that  xcere  beforo 
it ;  and  it  had  ten  "  horns, 
^c.  2.41,42. 


godly  ;"  Ivii.  4,  "whose  teeth  are  spears 
and  arrows  ;"  Iviii.  6,  "break  their  teeth 
in  their  mouth  ;  break  out  the  great  teeth 
of  the  young  lions." 

(e)  The  stamping  with  the  feet  (ver. 
7)  : — it  devoured  and  brake  in  pieces,  and 
stamj^ed  the  residue  with  the  feet  of  it. 
That  is,  like  a  fierce  monster,  whatever 
it  could  not  devour  it  stamped  down  and 
crushed  in  the  earth.  This  indicates  a 
disposition  or  purpose  to  destroy,  for 
the  sake  of  destroying,  or  where  no  other 
purpose  could  be  gained.  It  denotes 
rage,  wrath,  a  determination  to  crush  all 
in  its  way,  to  have  universal  dominion ; 
and  would  bo  applicable  to  a  nation  that 
subdued  and  crushed  others  for  the  mere 
sal-e  of  doing  it,  or  because  it  was  un- 
willing that  any  other  should  exist  and 
enjo}'  liberty — even  where  itself  could 
not  hope  for  any  advantage. 

{d)  The  fact  that  it  was  different  from 
all  that  went  before  it  (ver.  7): — and  it 
was  diverse  from  all  the  beasts  that  were 
before  it.  The  prophet  does  not  specify, 
particularly,  in  wliat  respects  it  was  dif- 
ferent, for  he  does  not  attempt  to  give 
its  appearance.  It  was  not  a  lion,  a 
bear,  or  a  leopard,  but  he  does  not  say 
precisely  what  it  was.  Probably  it  was 
such  a  monster  that  there  were  no  ani- 
mals with  which  it  could  be  compared. 
He  states  some  circumstances,  however, 
in  which  it  was  different — as  in  regard  to 
the  ten  horns,  the  little  horn,  the  iron 
teeth,  <fec.,  but  still  the  imagination  is 
left  to  fill  up  the  picture  in  general. 
The  meaning  of  this  must  be,  that  the 
fourth  kingdom,  represented  by  this  beast, 
would  be  materially  different  from  those 
which  preceded  it,  and  we  must  look  for 
the  fulfilment  in  some  features  that 
would  characterize  it  by  which  it  would 
be  unlike  the  others.  There  must  be 
something  marked  in  the  difference — 
something  that  would  be  more  than  the 
common  difference  between  nations. 

(e)  The  ten  horns  (ver.  7) : — and  it  had 
ten  horns.  That  is,  the  prophet  saw  on 
it  ten  horns  as  characterizing  the  beast. 
The  horn  is  a  symbol  of  power,  3nd  ia 
frequently  so  used  as  an  emblem  or  sym- 
bol in  Daniel  (vii.  7,  8,  20,  24,  viii  3—9, 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER    VII. 


299 


8  I   considered  the   horns,    and, 
behold,  there  came  up  among  them 

20 — 22),  and  Revelation  v.  6,  xiii.  1,  11, 
xvii.  3,  12,  16.  It  is  used  as  a  symbol 
because  the  great  strength  of  horned 
animals  is  found  there.  Thus  in  Amos 
vi.  13;  it  is  said, 

Ye  tbat  rejoice  in  a  thing  of  nought, 
That  say,  Have  we  not  taken  dominion  to  our- 
selves by  our  own  strength,    lleb.  horns. 

So  in  Deut.  xxxiii.  17. 

His  beauty  sball  be  that  of  a  young  bull, 
And  his  horns  shall  be  the  horns  of  a  rhin  iceros, 
With  these  he  shall  push  the  people  to  I'ae  ex- 
tremities of  the  land. 
Such  are  the  ten  thousands  of  Ephraim, 
Such  the  thousands  of  Manasseh.     Wemyss. 

So  in  1  Kings  xxii.  11,  wo  find  horns 
used  in  a  sj'mbolical  action  on  the  part 
of  the  false  prophet  Zedekiah.  "  He 
made  him  horns  of  iron,  and  said,  Thus 
saith  Jehovah,  With  these  thou  shalt  push 
the  Syrians,  until  thou  have  consumed 
them."  In  Zech.  i.  18,  the  four  horns 
that  are  seen  by  the  prophet  are  said  to 
be  the  four  great  powers  which  had  scat- 
tered and  wasted  the  Jews.  Comp.  We- 
myss on  the  symbolical  language  of 
Scripture,  Art.  horns.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  symbol 
here,  for  it  is  explained  in  a  subsequent  i 
part  of  the  chapter  (ver.  26),  '  the  ten  i 
horns  are  the  ten  kings  that  shall  arise.'  ] 
It  would  seem,  also,  from  that  explana- 
tion, that  they  were  to  be  ten  kings  that 
would  'arise'  or  spring  out  of  that  king- 
dom at  some  period  of  its  history.  "  And 
the  ten  horns,  out  of  this  kingdom,  are 
ten  kings  that  shall  arise;"  that  is,  not 
that  the  kingdom  itself  would  spring  out 
of  ten  others  that  would  be  amalgamated  j 
or  consolidated  into  one,  but  that  out  of  i 
that  one  kingdom  there  would  spring  up  ' 
ten  that  would  exercise  dominion,  or  in 
which  the  power  of  the  one  kingdom 
would  be  ultimately  lodged.  Though  Dan- 
iel appears  to  have  seen  these  horns  as  ap- 
pertaining to  the  beast  when  he  first  saw 
him,  yet  the  subsequent  explanation  is, 
that  these  horns  were  emblems  of  the 
manner  m  which  the  power  of  that  one 
kingdom  would  be  finally  exerted ;  or 
■.hat  ten  kings  or  dynasties  would  spring 
out  of  it.  We  are,  then,  naturally  to 
look  for  the  fulfilment  of  this  in  some  one 
great  kiagdom  of  huge  power  that  would 
crush  the  nations,  md  from  which,  while  j 


another  little  'horn,  before  ^^hom 

a  ver.  20,  21,  2-t. 

the  same  general  characteristic  would 
remain,  there  would  spring  up  ten  kings, 
or  dynasties,  or  kingdoms,  in  which  the 
power  would  be  concentrated. 

(/)  The  springing  up  of  the  little 
horn  (ver.  8) : — /  considered  the  horns, 
and,  heJioId,  there  came  vp  among  them 
another  little  horn.  There  are  several 
points  to  be  noticed  in  regard  to  this  : 
(1)  The  fact  that  he  'considered  the 
horns  ;'  that  is,  he  looked  on  them  until 
another  sprang  up  among  them.  This 
implies  tbat  when  he  first  saw  the  mon- 
ster, it  had  no  such  horn,  and  that  the 
horn  sprang  up  a  considerable  time  after 
he  first  saw  it — intimating  that  it  would 
occur  perhaps  far  on  in  the  history  of  the 
kingdom  that  was  symbolized.  It  is 
implied  that  it  was  not  an  event  which 
would  soon  occur.  (2)  It  sprang  up 
'among'  the  others; — jn^'J''? — starting 
from  the  same  source,  and  appertaining 
to  the  same  animal,  and,  therefore,  a  de- 
velopment or  putting  forth  of  the  same 
power.  The  language  here  used  does  not 
designate,  with  any  degree  of  certainty, 
the  precise  place  which  it  occupied,  but 
it  would  seem  that  the  others  stood  close 
together,  and  that  this  sprang  out  of  the 
tentre,  or  from  the  very  midst  of  them, 
implying  that  the  new  dominion  sym- 
bolized would  not  be  a  foreign  dominion, 
but  one  that  would  spring  out  of  the 
kingdom  itself,  or  that  would  seem  to 
grow  up  in  the  kingdom.  (3)  It  was  a 
little  horn  ;  that  is,  it  was  small  at  first, 
though  subsequently  it  grew  so  as  to  bo 
emblematic  of  great  power.  This  would 
denote  that  the  power  symbolized  would 
be  small  at  first — springing  up  gradually. 
The  fulfilment  of  this  would  be  found, 
neither  in  conquest,  nor  in  revolution, 
nor  in  a  change  of  dj'nasty,  nor  in  a  sud- 
den change  of  a  constitution,  but  in  some 
power  that  had  an  obscure  origin,  and 
that  was  feeble  and  small  at  the  begin, 
ning,  yet  gradually  increasing,  till,  by  its 
own  growth,  it  put  aside  a  portion  of  the 
power  before  exercised,  and  occupied  itf 
place.  We  should  naturally  look  for  the 
fulfilment  of  this  in  the  increase  of  soma 
power  within  the  state  that  had  an  humble 
origin,  and  that  slowly  developed  itself 
until  it  absorbed  a  coBsiderable  portion 


300 


DANIEL, 


[B,  C.  555 


there  -were  three  of  the  first  horns 
plucked  up  by  the  roots:    and  be- 
hold, in  this  horn  icere  eyes  like  the 
»Ke.  9.  7. 

of  the  authority  that  essentially  resided 
in  the  kingdom  represented  by  the  mon- 
ster. (4)  In  the  growth  of  that  'horn,' 
three  of  the  others  were  plucked  up  by 
the  roots.  The  proper  meaning  of  the 
word  used  to  express  this — 't?r'i'/\'!<  — 
is,  that  they  were  rooted  out — as  a  tree  is 
overturned  by  the  roots,  or  the  roots  are 
turned  out  from  the  earih.  The  process 
by  which  this  was  done  seems  to  have 
been  by  groicih.  The  gradual  increase 
of  the  horn  so  crowded  on  the  others 
that  a  portion  of  them  was  forced  out, 
and  fell.  What  is  fairly  indicated  by  this 
was  not  any  act  of  violence,  or  any  sud- 
den convulsion  or  revolution,  but  such  a 
gradual  growth  of  power  that  a  portion 
Df  the  original  power  was  removed,  and 
this  new  power  occupied  its  place.  There 
was  no  revolution,  properly  so  called; 
no  change  of  the  whole  dynasty,  for 
a  large  portion  of  the  horns  remained, 
but  the  gradual  rise  of  a  new  power  that 
would  wield  a  portion  of  that  formerly 
wielded  by  others,  and  that  would  now 
wield  the  power  in  its  place.  The  num- 
ber three  would  either  indicate  that  three 
parts  out  of  the  ten  were  absorbed  in  this 
way,  or  that  a  considerable,  though  an 
indefinite  portion,  was  thus  absorbed. 
(5)  The  ?yes  : — and  lehold,  in  this  horn 
were  eyes  like  the  eyes  of  a  7naii.  Eyes 
denote  intelligence,  as  we  see  objects  by 
their  aid.  The  rims  of  the  wheels  in 
Ezekiel's  vision  were  full  of  eyes  (Ezek. 
i.  18),  as  sj'mbolic  of  intelligence.  This 
■would  denote  that  the  power  here  re- 
ferred to,  would  be  remarkably  sagacious. 
We  should  naturally  look  for  the  fulfil- 
ment of  this  in  a  power  that  laid  its  plans 
wisely  and  intelligently ;  that  had  large 
and  clear  views  of  policy;  that  was 
shrewd  and  far-seeing  in  its  counsels 
and  purposes;  that  was  skilled  in  diplo- 
macj',  or  that  was  eminent  for  statesman- 
like plans.  This  part  of  the  symbol,  if 
it  stood  alone,  would  find  its  fulfilment 
in  any  wise  and  shrewd  administration  ; 
ns  it  stands  here,  surrounded  by  others, 
it  would  seem  that  this,  as  contrasted 
with  them,  was  characteristically  shrewd 
«nd  far-seeing  in  its  policy.  Lengerke, 
following    Jerome,   supposes     that    this 


eyes  of  =man,  and  a  mouth  fcspeak- 
ing  great  things. 

9^1  beheld  till  the  thrones  were 

b  Re.  13. 5. 


means  that  the  object  referred  to  would 
be  a  man,  '  as  the  eyes  of  men  are  keener 
and  sharper  than  those  of  other  animals.' 
But  the  more  correct  interpretation  is  that 
above  referred  to — that  it  denotes  intelli- 
gence, shrewdness,  sagacity.  (G)  The 
mouth : — and  a  month  speaJcinf/  great 
things.  A  mouth  indicating  pride  and 
arrogance.  This  is  explained  in  ver.  25, 
as  meaning  that  he  to  whom  it  refers 
would  'speak  great  words  against  the 
Most  High;'  that  is,  would  be  guilty  of 
blasphenij'.  There  would  be  such  arro- 
gance, and  such  claims  set  up,  and  such 
a  spirit  evinced,  that  it  would  be  in  fact 
a  speaking  against  God.  We  naturally 
look  for  the  fulfilment  of  this  to  some 
haughty  and  blaspheming  power:  some 
power  that  would  really  blaspheme  reli- 
gion, and  that  would  be  opposed  to  its 
progress  and  prosperity  in  the  world. 
The  Sept.  in  Cod.  Chis.  adds  here,  'and 
shall  make  war  against  the  saints  ;'  but 
these  words  are  not  found  in  the  original 
Chaldee.  They  accord,  however,  well 
with  the  explanation  in  ver.  25.  What 
has  been  here  considered  embraces  all 
that  pertains  pr.iperly  to  this  symbol — 
the  symbol  of  the  fourth  beast — except 
the  fact  stated  in  ver.  11,  that  the  beast 
was  slain,  and  that  his  body  was  given 
to  the  burning  flame.  The  inquiry  as  to 
the  fulfilment  will  be  appropriate  when 
we  come  to  consider  the  explanation 
given  at  the  request  of  Daniel,  by  the 
sngel,  in  vs.  19—25. 

9.  /  hcheld.  'I  continued  looking  on 
these  strange  sights,  and  contemplating 
these  transformations.'  This  implies  that 
some  time  elapsed  before  all  these  things 
had  occurred.  He  looked  on  till  he  saw 
a  solemn  judgment  passed  on  tliis  fourth 
beast  particularly  as  if  God  had  come 
forth  in  his  majesty  and  glory  to  pro- 
nounce that  judgment,  and  to  bring  the 
power  and  arrogance  of  the  beast  to  an 
end.  ^  Till  the  thrones  were  cast  down. 
The  Chaldee  word — ]iOno — means  pro 
perly  thrones — seats  on  which  monareha 
sit.  So  far  as  the  word  is  concerned,  it 
would  apply  either  to  a  throne  occupied 
by  an  earth'y  u  orarc^,  or  to  the  throne 
of  God.     Th\  ur\  f '■  t*)^  t-'>'-r'Hvv»proald 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER    VII 


301 


cast  » down,  and  the  Ancient  ''  of 
daj's  did  sit,  whose  garment  'ivas 
=  c.  2.  44;  1  Co.  15.  24,  25.    •>  Is.  9.  6 ;  ver.  22. 

^eem  to  imply,  at  least,  that  the  reference 
■is  not  to  the  throne  of  God,  but  to  some 
other  throne.  Maurer  and  Lengerke  sup- 
pose that  the  allusion  is  to  the  thrones 
on  v/hioh  the  celestial  beings  sit  in  the 
solemn  judgment  that  was  to  ba  pro- 
nounced— the  throne  of  God,  and  the 
thrones  or  scats  of  the  attending  inhabit- 
ants of  heaven,  coming  with  him  to  the 
solemn  judgment.  Lengerke  refers  for 
illustration  to  1  Kings  ,xxii.  19  ;  Isa.  vi.  1, 
Job  i.  and  He  v.  v.  11,  12.  But  the  word 
itself  xnight  be  properly  applied  to  the 
thrones  of  earthly  monarchs  as  well  as  to 
the  throne  of  God.  The  phrase  '  were 
cast  down' — vpn — in  our  translation, 
would  seem  to  suppose  that  thire  was 
some  throwing  down,  or  overturning  of 
thrones,  at  this  period,  and  that  the  so- 
lemn judgment  would  follow  this,  or  be 
consequent  on  this.  The  Chaldee  word — 
NOT — means,  as  explained  by  Gesenius, 
to  cast,  to  throw,  Dan.  iii.  21,  24;  vi.  17; 
to  set,  to  ^j/«c(?,  e.  (/.  thrones  ;  to  -impose 
tribute,  Ezra  vii.  24.  The  passage  is  ren- 
dered by  the  Latin  Vulgate,  throni  positi 
sunt — '  thrones  were  placed  ;'  by  the  Greek, 
ircSrinav — '  were  placed.'  So  Luther,  s<«/i/e 
gesetzt ;  and  so  Lengerke,  st'uhle  anfges- 
tellet — the  thrones  were  placed,  or  set  up. 
The  proper  meaning,  therefore,  of  the 
phrase  would  seem  to  be — not,  as  in  our 
translation,  that  the  '  thrones  would  be 
cast  doicn'— as  if  there  was  to  be  an  over- 
turning of  thrones  on  the  earth  to  mark 
this  particular  period  of  history — but  that 
there  was,  in  the  vision,  a  setting  up,  or 
a  placing  of  thrones  for  the  purpose  of  ad- 
ministering judgment,  &c.,  on  the  beast. 
The  use  of  the  plural  is,  doubtless,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  language  elsewhere  em- 
ployed, to  denote  the  fact  that  the  great 
Judge  would  be  surrounded  with  others 
who  would  be,  as  it  were,  associated  in 
administering  justice — either  angels  or 
redeemed  spirits.  Nothing  is  more  com- 
mon in  the  Scripture  than  to  repre- 
eent  others  as  thus  associated  with  God 
in  pronouncing  judgment  on  men. — 
Corap.  Matt.  xix.  2S,  Luke  xxviii.  .30, 
1  Cor.  vi.  2,  3,  1  Tim.  v.  21,  Rev.  ii.  26, 
iv.  4.  The  era,  or  period,  therefore, 
marked  here,  r^ould  be  when  a  solemn 
26 


white  d  as  snow,  and  the  hair  of  his 

head  like  the  pure  wool :  his  throne 

<:Ps.  45.  8;  rii.  3.  9.        ^  Re.  1. 14. 


divine  judgment  was  to  be  passed  on  the 
'  beast,'  or  when  some  events  were  to 
take  place,  as  if  such  a  judgment  were 
pronounced.  The  events  pertaining  to 
the  fourth  beast  were  to  be  the  last  in  tho 
series  preparatory  to  the  reign  of  the  saints, 
or  the  setting  up  of  the  kingdom  of  the 
Messiah,  and  therefore  it  is  introduced  in 
this  manner,  as  if  a  solemn  judgment 
scene  were  to  occur.  •[  And  the  Ancient 
of  days  didsit.  Was  seated  for  the  purposes 
of  judgment.  The  phrase  '  Ancient  of 
days  ' —  pCTi  p>n>2 — is  one  that  denotes  an 
elderly  or  old  person ;  meaning,  he  who 
is  most  ancient  as  to  days,  and  is  equiva- 
lent to  the  French  L'eternel,  or  English 
The  Eternal.  It  occurs  only  in  this  chap- 
ter (9,  13,  22),  and  is  a  representation  of 
one  venerable  in  years,  sitting  down  for 
the  purposes  of  judgment.  The  appella- 
tion does  not  of  itself  denote  eternity,  but 
it  is  employed,  probably,  with  reference 
to  the  fact  that  God  is  eternal.  God  is 
often  represented  under  some  such  appel- 
lation, as  he  that  is  '  from  everlasting  to 
everlasting'  (Ps.  xe.  2),  'the  first  and  the 
last'  (Isa.  xliv.  6),  &c.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  the  reference  here  is  to  God  as 
a  judge,  or  as  about  to  pronounce  judg- 
ment, though  there  is  no  necessity  of  sup- 
posing that  it  will  be  in  a  visible  and 
literal  form,  any  more  than  there  is 
for  supposing  that  all  that  is  here  rep- 
resented by  symbols  will  literally  take 
place.  If  it  should  be  insisted  on  that 
the  proper  interpretation  demands  that 
there  will  be  a  literal  and  visible  judg- 
ment, such  as  is  here  described,  it  may  be 
replied  that  the  same  rigid  interpretation 
would  demand  that  there  will  be  a  literal 
'slaying  of  the  beast,  and  a  giving  of  his 
body  to  the  flame'  (ver.  11),  and  more 
generally  still,  that  all  that  is  here  re- 
ferred to  by  symbols  will  literally  occur. 
The  fact,  however,  is,  that  all  these 
events  are  referred  to  by  symbols — sj'm- 
bols  which  have  an  expressive  meaning, 
but  which,  by  their  very  nature  and  de- 
sign, are  not  to  be  literally  understood 
All  that  is  fairly  implied  here  is,  tha 
events  would  occur  in  regard  to  this  fourth 
beast  as  if  God  should  sit  in  solemn  judg- 
ment on  it,  and  should  condemn  it  in  the 


302 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555 


►  was  like  the  fiery  flame,  and  his  ]  came  forth  from  before  him 
wheels  •>  as  burning  fire. 

10    A  fiery   "^  stream   issued  and 
»  Ac.  2.  30,  33.  ''  Eze.  1. 15, 16. 


manner  here  referred  to.  AVe  are,  doubt- 
less, in  the  fulfilment  of  this,  to  look  for 
some  event  that  will  be  of  so  decisive 
and  marked  a  character  that  it  may  be 
regarded  as  a  divine  judgment  in  the  case, 
or  that  will  show  the  strongly-marked 
divine  disapprobation — as  really  as  if  the 
judgment-seat  were  formally  set,  and  God 
should  appear  in  majesty  to  give  sen- 
tence. Sttti)i(/  was  the  usual  posture 
among  the  ancients,  as  it  is  among  the 
moderns,  in  pronouncing  judgment. — 
Among  the  ancients  the  judge  sat  on  a 
throne  or  bench  while  the  parties  stood 
before  him  (comp.  Zech.  i.  3),  and  with 
the  Greeks  and  Romans  so  essential  was 
the  sitting  posture  for  a  judge,  that  a  sen- 
tence pronounced  in  any  other  posture 
was  not  valid.  LengerJcc.  It  was  a  maxim. 
Animus  sedcndo  inagis  sopit,  or  as  Servius 
on  the  ^n.  i.  56,  remarks,  -Est  enim  cu- 
rantis  et  aolliciti  sedere.  ^  Whose  gar- 
ment was  white  as  snow.  Whose  robe. 
The  reference  here  is  to  the  long  flowing 
robe  that  was  worn  by  ancient  princes, 
noblemen,  or  priests.  See  Notes  on  Isa. 
vi.  1.  Comp.  Notes  on  Kev.  i.  13.  White 
was  an  emblem  of  purity  and  honour,  and 
was  not  an  improper  symbol  of  the  purity 
of  the  Judge,  and  of  the  justness  of  the 
sentence  which  he  would  pronounce.  So 
in  his  celebrated  speech  against  employ- 
ing Indians  in  the  war  with  the  American 
people,  the  elder  Pitt  besought  the  Bish- 
ops to  '  interpose  the  unsullied  purity  of 
their  lawn.'  Lengerke  supposes  as  Prof. 
Stuart  does,  on  Rev.  i.  13,  that  the  white- 
ness here  referred  to  was  not  the  mere 
colour  of  the  material  of  which  the  robe 
was  made,  but  was  a  celestial  splendour 
or  brightness,  as  if  it  were  lightning  or 
fire — such  as  is  appropriate  to  the  divine 
majesty.  Lengerke  refers  here  to  Ex. 
xix.  18—24,  Daniel  ii.  22,  Matt.  xvii.  2, 
1  Tim.  vi.  16,  Ezra  vii.  65,  Ascension  of 
Isa.  viii.  21—25,  Prov.  i.  13,  iv.  2.  But  the 
more  correct  interpretation  is  to  suppose 
that  this  refers  to  a  pure  white  robe,  such 
ns  judges  might  wear,  and  which  would 
not  be  an  improper  symbol  of  their  office. 
%  And  the  l.iir  of  his  head  like  the  2>n>'e 
wool.  That  is,  for  whiteness — a  charac- 
'•ristic  of  venerable  age.     Comp.  Notes 


thou- 
sand thousands  ministered  unto 
him,  and  ten   thousand   times  ten 

cPs.  50.  3.    Is.  66.15,16. 


on  Rev.  i.  14.  The  image  here  set  be- 
fore us  is  that  of  one  venerable  by  ycarg 
and  wisdom.  ^  His  throne  was  like  the 
fieri/  flame.  The  seat  on  which  he  sat 
seemed  to  be  fire.  That  is,  it  was  brilliant 
and  splendid,  as  if  it  were  a  mass  of  flame. 
^  And  his  K-heels  as  burning  fire.  The 
wheels  of  his  throne — for,  as  in  Ezek.  i.  10, 
the  throne  on  which  Jehovah  sat  appeared 
to  be  on  wheels.  In  Ezekiel  (i.  16,  x.  9), 
the  wheels  of  the  throne  appeared  to  be 
of  the  colour  of  beryl;  that  is,  they  were 
like  precious  stones.  Here,  perhaps,  they 
had  only  the  ajypearance  of  a  flame — as 
such  wheels  would  seem  to  flash  flames. 
So  Milton,  in  describing  the  chariot  of 
the  Son  of  God  : 

Forth  rush'd  with  whirlwind  sound 
The  chariot  of  Paternal  Deity, 
Flasliing  thick  flames,  wheel  within  wheel  un- 
drawn. 
Itself  instinct  with  spirit,  biit  conveyed 
By  four  cherubic  shapes ;  four  faces  each 
Had  wondrous  ;  as  with  stars  their  bodies  all, 
And  wings  were  set  with  eyes;  with  eyes  the 

wheels 
Of  Beryl,  and  careening  fires  hetween. 

Par.  Lost,  B.  vi. 

10.  A  fieri/  stream  issued  and  came  forth 
from  before  him.  Streams  of  fire  seemed 
to  burst  forth  from  his  throne.  Repre- 
sentations of  this  kind  abound  in  the 
Scriptures  to  ilhistrate  the  majesty  and 
glory  of  God.  Comp.  Rev.  iv.  5,  "And 
out  of  the  throne  proceeded  lightnings, 
and  thunderings,  and  voices."  Ex.  xix. 
16  ;  Habak.  iii.  4;  Ps.  xviii.  8.  ^  Thou- 
sand thousands  ministered  Knio  hi)n,  '  A 
thousand  of  thousands;'  that  is,  thou-, 
sands  multiplied  a  thousand  times.  Thtf 
mind  is  struck  with  the  fact  that  there 
are  thousands  present — and  then  the.p 
number  seems  as  great  as  if  those  thou- 
sands were  multiplied  a  thousand  times. 
The  idea  is  that  there  was  an  immense — 
a  countless  host.  The  reference  here  is 
to  the  angels,  and  God  is  often  repre- 
sented as  attended  with  great  numbers 
of  these  celestial  beings  when  be  comes 
down  to  our  world.  Dent,  xxxiii.  2. 
'  He  came  with  ten  thousands  of  saints;' 
that  is,  of  holy  ones.  Ps.  Ixviii.  17. 
"  The  chariots  of  God  are  twenty  thou- 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER   VII. 


303 


thousand  stood  » before  him;  the 
judgment  ^was  set,  and  the  books 
were  opened. 

al  Ki.  22. 19 ;  Ps.  68. 17  ;  He.  12.  22. 


11  I  beheld  then  because  of  th« 
voice  of  the  great  words  which  the 
horn  spake  :  I  beheld  even  till  the 

bRe.  20.  4, 12. 


sands,  even  thousands  of  angels."  Comp. 
Jude,  ver.  14.  The  word  '  ministered' 
means  that  they  attended  on  him.  ^  And 
ten  thousand  times  ten  thousand  stood  he- 
fore  him.  An  innumerable  host.  These 
were  not  to  be  judged,  but  were  attend- 
ants on  him  as  he  pronounced  sentence 
The  judgment  here  referred  to  was  not 
on  the  world  at  large,  but  on  the  beast, 
preparatory  to  giving  the  kingdom  to  the 
one  who  was  like  the  Son  of  Man,  vs. 
13,  14.  ^  The  judgment  was  set.  That 
is,  all  the  arrangements  for  a  solemn  act 
of  judgment  were  made,  and  the  process  1 
of  the  judgment  commenced.  *^  And  the  \ 
hooks  u-ere  opened.  As  containing  the 
record  of  the  deeds  of  those  who  were  to 
be  judged.  Comp.  Rev.  xx.  12.  The 
great  Judge  is  represented  as  having  be- 
fore him  the  record  of  all  the  deeds  on 
which  judgment  was  to  bo  pronounced, 
and  to  be  about  to  pronounce  sentence 
according  to  those  deeds.  The  judgment 
here  referred  to,  seems  to  have  been  some 
solemn  act  on  the  part  of  God  transfer- 
ring the  power  over  the  world,  from  that 
■which  had  long  swayed  it,  to  the  saints. 
As  already  remarked,  the  necessary  in-  j 
tcrpretation  of  the  passage  does  not  re- 1 
quire  us  to  understand  this  of  a  literal 
and  visible  judgment — of  a  personal  ap-  j 
pearing  of  the  '  Ancient  of  Days' — of  a ! 
formal  application  to  him  by  '  one  like  i 
the  Son  of  Man'  (ver.  13) — or  of  a  public 
and  visible  making  over  to  him  of  a  king-  ] 
dom  upon  the  earth.  It  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that  all  this  passed  in  vision  before 
the  mind  of  the  prophet — that  it  is  a  sym- 
bolical representation — and  that  we  are 
to  find  the  fulfilment  of  this  in  some 
event  changing  the  course  of  empire — 
putting  a  period  to  the  power  represented 
by  the  'beast'  and  the  '  horn' — and  caus- 
ing that  power  to  pass  into  other  hands — 
producing  a  change  as  great  on  the  earth 
««  j/such  a  solemn  act  of  judgment  were 
passed.  The  nature  of  the  representation 
requires  that  we  should  look  for  the  ful- 
filment of  this  in  some  great  and  mo- 
mentous change  in  human  afi"airs — some 
svonts  that  would  take  aw.ay  the  power 
of  the  '  beast,'  and  that  would  cause  the 
dominion     to     pass    into    other    hands. , 


On   the    fulfilment,   see    the   Notes    on 
ver.  26. 

11.  I  beheld  then  because  of  the  voice  of 
the  fjreat  words  which  the  horn  spake.  I 
was  attracted  by  these  words — by  their 
arrogance,  and  haughtiness,  and  pride  ; 
and  I  saw  that  it  was  on  account  of  these 
mainly  that  the  solemn  judgment  pro- 
ceeded against  the  beast.  The  attitude 
of  the  Seer  here  is  this — he  heard  arro- 
gant and  proud  words  uttered  by  tho 
'  horn,'  and  he  waited  in  deep  attention, 
and  in  earnest  expectation,  to  learn  what 
judgment  could  be  pronounced.  He  had 
seen  (ver.  8)  that  horn  spring  up  and 
grow  to  great  power,  and  utter  great 
things;  he  had  then  seen,  immediately 
on  this,  a  solemn  and  sublime  preparation 
for  judgment,  and  he  now  waited  anx- 
iously to  learn  what  sentence  would  be 
pronounced.  The  result  is  stated  in  the 
subsequent  part  of  the  verse.  ^  /  beheld. 
I  continued  beholding.  This  would  seem 
to  imply  that  it  was  not  done  at  once, 
but  that  some  time  intervened.  ^  Even 
till  the  beast  icas  slain.  The  fourth  boast: 
that  which  had  the  ten  horns,  and  on 
which  the  little  horn  had  sprung  up. 
This  was  the  result  of  the  judgment.  It 
is  evidently  implied  here  that  the  beast 
was  slain  on  account  of  the  words  uttered 
by  the  horn  that  sprang  up,  or  that  the 
pride  and  arrogance  denoted  by  that 
symbol  were  the  cause  of  the  fact  that 
the  beast  was  put  to  death.  It  is  not  said 
ft)/  whom  the  beast  would  be  slain,  but  the 
fair  meaning  is,  that  the  procuring  cause 
of  that  death  would  be  the  divine  judg- 
ment on  account  of  the  pride  and  arro- 
gancy  of  the  '  horn'  that  sprang  up  in 
the  midst  of  the  others.  If  the  '  beast' 
represents  a  mighty  monarchy  that  would 
exist  on  the  earth,  and  the  'little  horn' 
a  new  power  that  would  spring  out  of 
that,  then  the  fulfilment  is  to  be  found 
in  such  a  fact  as  this — that  this  power  so 
mighty  and  terrible  formerly,  and  that 
crushed  down  the  nations,  would,  under 
the  divine  judgment,  be  ultimately  de- 
stroyed on  account  of  the  nature  of  the 
authority  claimed.  We  are  to  look  for 
the  accomplishment  of  this  in  some  such 
state  of  things  as  that  of  a  new  power 


30-4 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555t 


ceaso  was  » slain,  and  his  body  de- 
stroyed, and  given  to  the  burning 
llame. 

a  Re.  19,  20. 

*>  a  prolonging  in  life  was  given  them. 

springing  out  of  an  existing  dominion, 
that  the  existing  dominion  still  remains, 
bnt  was  so  much  controlled  by  the  new 
power  that  it  would  be  necessary  to  de- 
stroy the  former  on  account  of  the  arro- 
gance and  pride  of  that  which  sprang 
from  it.  In  other  words,  the  destruction 
of  the  kingdom  represented  by  the  fourth 
beast,  would  be,  as  a  divine  judgment,  on 
account  of  the  arrogancy  of  that  repre- 
sented by  the  little  horn.  ^  And  his 
body  destroyed.  That  is,  there  would  be 
a  destruction  of  the  kingdom  here  repre- 
sented as  much  as  there  would  be  of  the 
beast  if  his  body  was  destroyed.  The 
power  of  that  kingdom,  as  such,  is  to 
come  to  an  end.  ^  And  f/ivcn  to  the 
hurning  flame.  Consumed.  This  wovUd 
represent,  in  strong  terms,  that  the  power 
hero  symbolized  by  the  beast  would  be 
utterly  destroyed.  It  is  not,  however, 
necessary  to  suppose  that  this  is  to  be 
the  mode  in  which  it  would  be  done,  or 
that  it  would  be  by  fire.  It  is  to  be  re- 
membered that  all  this  is  symbol,  and  no 
one  part  of  the  symbol  should  be  taken 
literally  more  than  another,  nor  is  it  con- 
gruous to  suppose  there  would  be  a  literal 
consuming^/'e  in  the  case  any  more  than 
that  there  would  be  literally  a  beast,  or 
ten  horns,  or  a  little  horn.  The  fair 
meaning  is,  that  there  would  be  as  real  a 
destruction  as  if  \t  were  accomplished  by 
fire  ;  or  a  destruction  of  which  fire  would 
be  the  proper  emblem.  The  allusion  is  here, 
probably,  to  the  fact  that  the  dead  bodies 
of  animals  were  often  consumed  by  fire. 

12.  As  concerning  the  rest  of  the  beasts. 
They  had  been  superseded,  but  not  de- 
stroyed. It  would  seem  that  they  were 
Btill  represented  in  vision  to  Daniel,  as 
retaining  their  existence,  though  their 
power  was  taken  away,  and  their  fierce- 
ness subdued,  or  that  they  still  seemed  to 
remain  alive  for  a  time,  or  while  the 
vision  was  passing.  They  were  not  cut 
down,  destroyed,  and  consumed  as  the 
fourth  beast  was.  ^  They  had  their 
dominion  taken  away.  They  were  super- 
leded,  or  they  no  longer  exercised  power. 
3?hey  no  more  appeared,  exerting  a 
control    over    the    nations.      They   still 


12  As  concerning  the  rest  of  the 
beasts  they  had  their  dominion 
taken  away :  yet  ^  their  lives  were 
prolonged  for  a  season  and  time. 


existed,  but  they  were  subdued  and 
quiet.  It  was  possible  to  discern  them, 
but  they  no  longer  acted  the  conspi- 
cuous part  which  they  had  done  in  tho 
days  of  their  greatness  and  grandeui-. 
Their  power  had  passed  away.  This 
cannot  be  difficult  of  interpretation.  We 
should  naturally  look  for  the  fulfilment 
of  this  in  the  fact  that  the  nations  refe."red 
to  by  these  first  three  beasts  were  still  in 
being,  and  could  be  recognized  as  na- 
tions— in  their  boundaries,  or  customs,  or 
languages,  but  that  the  ^jor-cc  which  they 
had  wielded  had  passed  into  other  hands. 
^  Yet  their  lives  were  prolonged.  Marg., 
as  in  Chald. — 'a  prolonging  in  life  was 
given  them.'  That  is,  they  were  not 
utterly  destroyed  and  consumed  as  the 
power  of  the  fourth  beast  was  after 
the  solemn  judgment.  The  meaning  is, 
that  in  these  kingdoms  there  would  be 
energy  for  a  time.  They  had  life 
still,  and  the  difference  between  them 
and  the  kingdom  represented  by  the 
fourth  beast,  was  that  which  would  exist 
between  wild  animals  subdued  but  still 
living,  and  a  wild  animal  killed  and 
burned.  We  should  look  for  the  fulfil- 
ment of  this  in  some  state  of  things  where 
the  kingdoms  referred  to  by  the  three 
beasts  were  subdued  and  succeeded  by 
others,  though  they  still  retained  some- 
thing of  their  national  character,  while 
the  other  kingdom  had  no  successor  of  a 
civil  kind,  but  where  its  power  wholly 
ceased,  and  the  dominion  went  wholly 
into  other  hands— so  that  it  might  be 
said  that  that  kingdom  as  such  had 
u-holly  ceased  to  be.  *[  For  a  season  and 
time.  Comp.  Notes  on  ver.  25.  Tho 
time  mentioned  here  is  not  definite. 
The  phrase  used — p^i  ]PT-njJ — refers  to 
a  definite  period,  both  the  words  in 
the  original  referring  to  a  designated  oi 
ajipointed  time,  though  neither  of  them 
indicates  anything  about  the  length  of 
the  time,  any  more  than  our  word  timt 
does.  Luther  renders  this,  '  for  there 
was  a  time  and  an  hour  appointed  to  then 
how  long  each  one  should  continue.' 
Grotius  explains  this  as  meaning,  '  be 
yond  the  time  fixed  by  God  they  could 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER    VII. 


305 


13  I  saw  in  the  night  visions, 
and,  behold,  one  like  the  Son  of  man 
came  -with   the   clouds   of  heaven, 

'  Matt.  24.  30 ;  25. 31 ;  26.  6i ;  lie.  1.  7, 13;  U.  U. 

not  continue.'  The  true  meaning  of  the 
Chaldeo  is  probably  this  :  '  for  a  time, 
even  a  definite  time.'  The  mind  of  the 
prophet  is  at  first  fixed  upon  the  fact  that 
they  continue  to  live;  then  upon  the 
fact,  somehow  apparent,  that  it  is  for  a 
definite  period.  Perhaps  in  the  vision 
he  saw  them  one  after  another  die  or  dis- 
appear. In  the  words  here  used,  how- 
ever, there  is  nothing  by  which  we  can 
determine  Jwto  long  they  were  to  con- 
tinue. The  time  that  the  power  repre- 
sented by  the  little  horn  is  to  continue, 
is  explained  in  ver.  25,  but  there  is  no 
clue  bj'  which  we  can  ascertain  how  long 
the  existence  of  the  power  represented 
by  the  first  three  beasts  was  to  continue. 
All  that  is  clear  is,  that  it  was  to  be 
lengthened  out  for  some  period,  but  that 
that  was  a  definite  and  fixed  period. 

13.  /  saw  in  the  night  visions.  Evi- 
dently in  the  same  night  visions,  or  on 
the  same  occasion,  for  the  visions  are 
connected.  See  vs.  1,  7.  The  meaning 
is,  that  he  continued  beholding,  or  that  a 
new  vision  passed  before  him.  ^  And, 
behold,  one  like  the  Son  of  Man,  &e.  It 
is  remarkable  that  Daniel  does  not  at- 
tempt to  represent  this  by  any  symbol. 
The  representation  by  symbols  ceases 
■with  the  fourth  beast,  and  now  the  de- 
scription assumes  a  literal  form — the  set- 
ting up  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah 
and  of  the  saints.  Wh;/  this  change  of 
form  occurs  is  not  stated  or  known,  but 
the  sacred  writers  seem  carefully  to  have 
avoided  any  representation  of  the  Mes- 
siah by  symbols.  The  phrase  '  the  Son 
of  Man' — V)H,  -i3 — does  not  occur  else- 
where in  the  Old  Testament,  in  such  a 
oonnection,  and  with  such  a  reference  as 
it  has  here,  though  it  is  often  found  in 
the  New,  and  is,  in  fact,  the  favourite 
term  by  which  the  Saviour  designates 
himself.  In  Dan.  iii.  25,  we  have  the 
phrase  'the  Son  of  God,'  (see  Notes  on 
that  pas.sage,)  as  applicable  to  one  who 
appeared  with  the  three  'children'  that 
were  cast  into  the  burning  furnace,  and 
in  Ezekiel  the  phrase  '  Son  of  M.an'  often 
occurs  as  applicable  to  himself  as  a  pro- 
phet, being  found  more  than  eighty  times 
in  his  prophecies,  but  the  expression  here. 
26* 


and  »came  to  the  Ancient  b  of  days, 
and  they  brought  him  near  before 
him. 


b  ver.  9. 


used  does  not  elsewhere  occur  in  the  Old 
Testament  as  applicable  to  the  personage 
intended.  As  occurring  here,  it  is  im- 
portant to  explain  it,  not  only  in  view  of 
the  events  connected  with  it  in  the 
prophecy,  but  as  having  done  much  to 
mould  the  language  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. There  are  three  questions  in  re- 
gard to  its  meaning.  What  does  it  sig- 
nify ?  To  whom  does  it  refer?  And 
what  would  be  its  proper  fulfilment  ? 
(1)  The  phrase  is  more  than  a  mere  He- 
brew or  Chaldee  expression  to  denote 
man,  but  is  always  used  with  some  pecu- 
liar significancy,  and  with  relation  to 
some  peculiar  characteristic  of  the  per- 
son to  whom  it  is  applied,  or  with  some 
special  design.  To  ascertain  this  de- 
sign, regard  should  be  had  to  the  ex- 
pression of  the  original.  "AVhile  the 
words  U'lN  and  nu'N  are  used  simply  as 
designations  of  sex,  rijK,  which  is  etymo- 

j  logically  akin  to  rix,  is  employed  with 
constant  reference  to  its  original  mean- 
ing, to   be  weak,   sick;  it   is   the   ethical 

I  designation  of  man,  but  DiN  denotes  man 

i  as    to    his    physical,    natural    condition, 

j  whence  the  use  of  the  word  in  such  pas- 
sages as  Ps.  viii.  4 ;  Job  xxv.  6,  and  also 

I  its  connection  with  ]3,  are  satisfactorily 
explained.     The    emphatic   address    Son 

'  of  3Tan  is  therefore  [in  Ezekiel]  a  con- 
tinued admonition  to  the  prophet  to  re- 
member that  he  is  a  man  like  all  the  rest." 

I  Haivernick,  com.  on  Ezek.  ii.  1,  2,  quoted 
in    the   Bibliotheca   Sacra,  v.  718.     The 

:  expression  here  used  is  rijX  13,  and 
y^ould  properly  refer  to  man  as  weak  and 
feeble,  and  as  liable  to  be  sick,  <fec.  Ap- 
plied to  any  one  as  'the  Son  of  Man,' it 
would  be  used  to  denote  that  he  jjartook 
of  the  weakness  and  infirmities  of  the 
race;  and,  as  the  phrase  'Son  of  Man'  is 
used  in  the  New  Testament  when  applied 
by  the  Saviour  to  himself,  there  is  an 
undoubted  reference  to  this  fiict — that  he 
sustained  a  peculiar  relation  to  our  race; 
that  he  was  in  all  respects  a  man  ;  that 
he  was  one  of  us  ;  that  he  had  so  taken 
our  nature  on  himself  that  there  was  a 
peculiar    propriety   that  a    tern   which 


306 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555 


would  at  once  designate  this  should  he 
given  to  him.  The  phrase  here  used  by 
Daniel  would  denote  some  one  (a)  in  the 
human  form;  (?/)some  one  sustaining  a 
peculiar  relation  to  man — as  if  human 
nature  were  embodied  in  him.  (2)  The 
next  inquiry  here  is,  to  u-hom  this  refers? 
Who,  in  fact,  was  the  one  that  was  thus 
seen  in  vision  by  the  propiiet  ?  Or  who 
was  designed  to  be  set  forth  by  this  ? 
This  inquiry  is  not  so  much,  Who  did 
Daniel  suppose  or  understand  this  to 
be,  as.  Who  was  in  fact  designed  to  be 
represented?  Or  in  whom  would  the  ful- 
filment be  found?  For,  on  the  supposition 
that  this  was  a  heavenly  vision,  it  is  clear 
that  it  was  intended  to  designate  some  one 
in  whom  the  complete  fulfilment  was  to  be 
found.  Now,  admitting  that  this  was  a 
heavenly  vision,  and  that  it  was  intended 
to  represent  what  would  occur  in  future 
times,  there  are  the  clearest  reasons  for 
supposing  that  the  Messiah  was  referred 
to,  and  indeed  this  is  so  plain,  that  it 
may  be  assumed  as  one  of  the  indisput- 
able things  by  which  to  determine  the 
character  and  design  of  the  prophecy. 
Among  thes'  reasons  are  the  follow- 
ing :  (a)  The  name  itself,  as  a  name  as- 
sumed by  the  Lord  Jesus — the  favourite 
name  by  which  he  chose  to  designate 
himself  when  on  the  earth.  This  name 
he  used  technically,-  he  used  it  as  one 
that  would  be  understood  to  denote  the 
Messiah  ;  ho  used  it  as  if  it  needed  no 
explanation  as  having  a  reference  to  the 
Messiah.  But  this  usage  could  have  been 
derived  only  from  this  passage  in  Daniel — 
for  there  is  no  other  place  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament where  the  name  could  refer  with 
propriety  to  the  Messiah,  or  would  be  un- 
derstood to  be  applicable  to  him.  (h)  This 
interpretation  has  been  given  to  it  by  the 
Jewish  writers,  in  general,  in  all  ages. 
I  refer  to  this,  not  to  say  that  their  ex- 
planation is  authoritative,  but  to  show 
that  it  is  the  natural  and  obvious  mean- 
ing, and  because,  as  we  shall  see,  it  is 
that  which  has  given  shape  and  form  to 
the  language  of  the  New  Testament,  and 
is  fully  sanctioned  there.  Thus  in  the 
ancient  Book  of  Zohar  it  is  said,  "  In  the 
times  of  the  Messiah,  Israel  shall  be  one 
people  to  the  Lord,  and  he  shall  make 
them  one  nation  in  the  earth,  and  they 
shall  rule  above  and  below;  as  it  is  writ- 
ten, behold  one  like  the  Son  of  Man  came 
Kith  the  clouds  of  heaven  ;  this  is  the  king 
Messiah,  of  whom  it  is  written,  and  in  the 


days  of  these  Icings  shall  the  God  of  heaven 
set  It])  a  Icinr/doni  which  shall  nerpr  be  de- 
stroyed,"  Ac.  So  in  the  Talmua,  and  so 
the  majority  of  the  ancient  Jewish  Rab- 
bins. See  Gill,  com.,  in  loc.  It  is  true 
that  this  interpretation  has  not  been  uni- 
form among  the  Jewish  Rabbins,  but  still 
it  has  prevailed  among  them,  as  it  has 
among  Christian  interpreters,  (c)  A  sanc- 
tion seems  to  be  given  to  this  interpreta- 
tion by  the  adoption  of  the  title  'Son  of 
Man'  by  the  Lord  Jesus,  as  that  by  which 
he  chose  to  designate  himself.  That  title 
was  such  as  would  constantly  suggest  this 
place  in  Daniel  as  referring  to  himself, 
and  especially  as  he  connected  with  it  the 
declaration  that  '  the  Son  of  Man  would 
come  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,'  <tc.  It 
was  hardly  possible  that  he  should  use 
the  title  in  such  a  connection  without 
suggesting  this  place  in  Daniel,  or  with- 
out leaving  the  impression  on  the  minds 
of  his  hearers  that  he  meant  to  be  under- 
stood as  applying  this  to  himself,  (rf)  It 
may  be  added,  that  it  cannot  with  pro- 
priety be  applied  to  any  other.  Porphyry, 
indeed,  supposed  that  Judas  Maccabeus 
was  intended;  Grotius  that  it  referred  to 
the  Roman  people ;  Aben  Ezra  to  the 
people  of  Israel ;  and  Cocceius  to  the  peo- 
ple of  the  Most  High  {Gill) ;  but  all  these 
are  unnatural  interpretations,  and  are  con- 
trary to  that  which  one  would  obtain  by 
allowing  the  language  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment to  influence  his  mind.  The  title — 
so  often  used  by  the  Saviour  himself;  the 
attending  circumstances  of  the  clouds  of 
heaven  ;  the  p/tice  which  the  vision  occu- 
pies— so  immediately  preceding  the  set- 
ting up  of  the  kingdom  of  the  saints ; 
and  the  fact  that  that  kingdom  can  be 
set  up  only  under  the  Messiah,  all  point 
to  him  as  the  personage  represented  in 
the  vision.  (3)  But  if  it  refers  to  the 
Messiah,  the  next  enquiry  is,  AVhat  is  to 
be  regarded  as  the  proper  fulfilment  of 
the  vision  ?  To  what  precisely  does  it 
relate  ?  Are  we  to  suppose  that  there 
will  be  a  literal  appearing  of  the  Son 
of  Man— the  Messiah — in  the  clouds  of 
heaven,  and  a  passing  over  of  the  king- 
dom in  a  public  and  solemn  manner  into 
the  hands  of  the  saints?  In  reply  to 
these  questions,  it  may  be  remarked, 
{a)  that  this  cannot  be  understood  as  re- 
lating to  the  last  judgment — for  it  is  not 
introduced  with  reference  to  that  at  all. 
The  'Son  of  Man'  is  not  here  represented 
as  coming  with  a  view  to  judge  the  world 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER    VII. 


307 


at  the  winding  up  of  human  affairs,  but 
for  the  purpose  of  setting  up  a  kingdom, 
or  procuring  a  kingdom  for  his  saints. 
There  is  no  assembling  of  the  people  of 
che  world  together;  no  aetof  judging  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked;  no  pronounc- 
mg  of  a  sentence  on  either.  It  is  evident 
that  the  world  is  to  continue  much  longer 
nnder  the  dominion  of  the  saints.  (6)  It 
is  not  to  be  taken  literally ;  that  is,  we 
are  not,  from  this  passage,  to  expect  a 
literal  appearance  of  the  Son  of  Man  in 
the  clouds  of  heaven,  preparatory  to  the 
setting  up  of  the  kingdom  of  the  saints. 
For  if  one  portion  is  to  be  taken  lit- 
erally, there  is  no  reason  why  all  should 
not  be.  Then  we  are  to  expect,  not 
merely  the  appearing  of  the  Son  of  Man 
in  the  clouds,  but  also  the  following 
things,  as  a  part  of  the  fulfilment  of  the 
vision,  to  wit :  the  literal  placing  of  a 
throne,  or  seat;  the  literal  streaming 
forth  of  flame  from  his  throne  ;  the  literal 
appearing  of  the  'Ancient  of  days,'  with 
a  garment  of  white,  and  hair  as  wool ;  a 
literal  approach  of  the  Son  of  Man  to  him 
as  seated  on  his  throne  to  ask  of  him  a 
kingdom,  &c.  But  no  one  can  believe 
that  all  this  is  to  occur;  no  one  does 
believe  that  it  will,  (c)  The  proper  in- 
terpretation is  to  regard  this,  as  it  was 
Been  by  Daniel,  as  a  vision — a  represen- 
tation of  a  state  of  things  in  the  world  as 
if  what  is  here  described  would  occur. 
That  is,  great  events  were  to  take  place, 
of  which  this  would  be  a  proper  symboli- 
cal representation — or  as  if  the  Son  of 
Man,  the  Messiah,  would  thus  appear ; 
would  approach  the  'Ancient  of  days;' 
would  receive  a  kingdom,  and  would 
make  it  over  to  the  saints.  Now,  there 
is  no  real  difficulty  in  understanding  what 
is  here  meant  to  be  taught,  and  what  we 
are  to  expect ;  and  these  points  of  fact 
are  the  following,  viz  : — 1.  That  he  who 
is  here  called  the  'Ancient  of  days,'  is 
the  source  of  power  and  dominion.- — 
2.  That  there  would  be  some  severe  ad- 
judication in  the  power  here  represented 
by  the  beast,  and  the  horn.  3.  That  the 
kingdom  or  dominion  of  the  world  is  to 
be  in  fact  given  to  him  who  is  here  called 
the  'Son  of  Man' — the  Messiah — a  fact 
represented  here  by  his  approaching  the 
'Ancient  of  daj's,'  and  who  is  the  source  of 
all  power.  4.  That  there  is  to  be  some 
passing  oyer  of  the  kingdom  or  power 
into  the  hands  of  the  saints ;  or  some  set- 
ting up  of  a  kingdom   >n  the  earth,  of 


'  which  he  is  to  be  the  head,  Lnd  in  which 
I  the  dominion  over  the  world  shall  be  in 
I  fact  in  the  hands  of  his  people,  and  the 
'  laws  of  the  Messiah  everywhere  prevau. 
What  will  bo  the  essential  characteristics 
of  that  kingdom  we  may  learn  by  the  ex- 
position of  ver.  14,  compared  with  ver.  27. 
,  ^  Came  icith  the  clouds  of  heaven.     That 
I  is,  he  seemed  to  come  down  from  the  sky 
encompassed  with  clouds.    So  the  Saviour, 
probably  intending  to  refer  to  this  lan- 
I  guage,  speaks  of  himself,  when  he  shall 
come  to  judge  the  world,  as  coming  in 
clouds,  or  encompassed  by  clouds.     Matt, 
sxiv.  30,  xxvi.  64,  Mark  siii.  26,  xiv.  G2. 
Comp.  Rev.  i.  7.     Clouds  are  an   appro- 
priate symbol  of  the  divinity.     See  Ps. 
xcvii.  2,  civ.  3.    The  same  symbol  was  em- 
ployed by  the  heathen,  representing  their 
deities  as  appearing  covered  with  a  cloud: 

Tandem  venias,  precamur, 
Nube  candentes  humeros  amictus. 
Augur  Apollo. 

The  allusion  in  the  place  before  us,  is  not 
to  the  last  judgment,  but  to  the  fact  that 
a  kingdom  on  the  earth  would  be  passed 
over  into  the  hands  of  the  Messiah.  Ho 
is  represented  as  coming  sublimely  to  the 
woidd  and  as  receiving  a  kirgdom  that 
would  succeed  those  represented  by  the 
beasts.  ^  And  came  to  the  Ancient  of 
dai/s,  ver.  9.  This  shows  that  the  passage 
cannot  refer  to  the  final  judgment.  He 
comes  to  the  'Ancient  of  days' — to  God 
as  the  source  of  power,  as  if  to  ask  a  pe- 
tition for  a  kingdom  ;  not  to  pronounce  a 
judgment  on  mankind.  The  act  here 
appropriately  denotes  that  God  is  the 
source  of  all  power ;  that  all  who  reign 
derive  their  authority  from  him,  and  that 
even  the  Messiah,  in  setting  up  his  king- 
dom in  the  world,  receives  it  at  the  hand 
of  the  Father.  This  is  in  accordance 
with  all  the  representations  in  the  Now 
Testament.  AVe  are  not  to  suppose  that 
this  will  occur  literally.  There  is  to  be 
no  such  literal  sitting  of  one  with  the 
appearance  of  age — denoted  by  the  '  An- 
cient of  days' — on  a  throne;  nor  is  there 
to  bo  any  such  literal  approaching  him 
by  one  in  the  form  of  a  man  to  receive  a 
kingdom.  Such  passages  show  the  ab- 
surdity of  the  attempts  to  interpret  the 
language  of  the  Scriptures  literally.  All 
that  this  symbol  fairly  means  must  be, 
that  the  kingdom  that  was  to  be  setup  un- 
der the  Messiah  on  the  earth  was  received 
from  God.     •[  And  they  br.'>ught  \im  near 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  555 


14  And  'there  Avas  given  him  do- 
minion, and  glory,  and  a  kingdom, 
that  all  people,  nations,  and  lan- 
guages  should  serve  him :   his  do- 

Ts.  2  6— S ;  Matt.  28. 18  ;  Jn.  3. 35 ;  1  Co.  15. 2" ; 
Ep.  1.  20.  22. 

before  Tivn.  That  is,  he  Tras  brought  near 
before  him.  Or,  it  may  meau  that  his 
attendants  brought  him  near.  All  that 
the  language  necessarily  implies  is,  that 
he  came  near  to  his  seat,  and  received 
from  him  a  kingdom. 

14.  And  there  uas  given  him  domin- 
ion. That  is,  by  him  who  is  represented 
as  the  '  Ancient  of  da.ys.'  The  fair  inter- 
pretation of  this  is,  that  he  received  the 
dominion  from  him.  This  is  the  uniform 
representation  in  the  New  Testament. 
Comp.  Matt,  xxviii.  IS ;  John  iii.  35 ; 
1  Cor.  XV.  27.  The  word  dominion  here 
means  rule  or  anthoi'ity — such  as  a  prince 
exercises.  He  was  set  over  a  kingdom 
as  a  prince  or  ruler.  ^Andglory.  That 
is,  the  glory  or  honor  appropriate  to  one 
at  the  head  of  such  an  em])ire.  ^  And  a 
liinfjdom.  That  is,  ho  would  reign.  Ho 
would  have  sovereignty.  The  nature  and 
the  extent  of  this  kingdom  is  immediately 
designated  as  one  that  would  be  uni- 
versal and  perpetual.  What  is  properly 
implied  in  this  language  as  to  the  ques- 
tion whether  it  will  be  literal  and  visible, 
will  be  appropriately  considered  at  the 
close  of  the  verse.  All  that  is  necessary 
to  be  noticed  here  is,  that  it  is  everywhere 
promised  in  the  Old  Testament  that  the 
Messiah  would  be  a  king,  and  have  a 
kingdom.  Comp.  Ps.  ii.,  Isa.  ix.  6.  7. 
*[  That  oil  people,  nations,  and  languar/es 
should  serve  him.  It  would  be  univer- 
sal: would  embrace  all  nations.  The 
language  here  is  such  as  would  emphati- 
cally denote  universality.  See  Notes  on 
ch.  iii.  4;  iv.  1.  It  implies  that  that  king- 
dom would  extend  over  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth,  and  we  are  to  look  for  the  ful- 
filment of  this  only  in  such  a  universal 
reign  of  the  Messiah.  ^  His  dominion  is 
an  everlasting  dominion,  &c.  The  others, 
represented  by  the  four  beasts,  would  all 
pass  away,  but  this  would  be  permanent 
and  eternal.  Nothing  would  destroy  it.  I 
It  would  not  have,  as  most  kingdoms  of 
the  earth  have  had,  any  such  internal  ■ 
weakness  or  source  of  discord  as  would  I 
be  the  cause  of  its  destruction,  nor  would  I 
there  be  any  external  power  that  would  [ 


minion  is  an  everlasting  ^dominion, 
■which  shall  not  pass  away,  and  hia 
kingdom  that  M'hich  shall  not  ^hs 
destroyed. 


b  Ps.  145. 13. 


■  He.  12.  28. 


invade  or  overthrow  it.  This  declaration 
afiirms  nothing  as  to  the  form  in  which 
the  kingdom  would  exist,  but  merely  as- 
serts the  fact  that  it  would  do  so.  Re- 
specting the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah,  to 
which  this  undoubtedly  alludes,  the  same 
thing  is  repeatedly  and  uniformly  affirmed 
in  the  New  Testament.  Comp.  Matt.  xvi. 
18 ;  Heb.  xii.  28  ;  Rev.  xi.  15.  The  form 
and  manner  in  which  this  will  occur,  is 
more  fully  developed  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment; in  the  vision  seen  by  Daniel  the 
fact  only  is  stated. 

The  question  now  arises,  What  would 
be  a  fulfilment  of  this  prediction  respect- 
ing the  kingdom  that  will  be  given  to  the 
saints  ?  AVhat,  from  the  language  used 
in  the  vision,  should  we  be  legitimately 
authorized  to  expect  to  take  place  on  the 
earth?  In  regard  to  these  questions, 
there  are  but  two  views  which  can  be 
taken,  and  the  interpretation  of  the  pas- 
sage must  sustain  the  one  or  the  other. 
(«)  One  is  that  which  supposes  that  this 
will  be  literally  fulfilled  in  the  sense  that 
the  Son  of  God,  the  Messiah,  will  reign 
personally  on  ear.h.  According  to  this, 
ho  will  come  to  set  up  a  visible  and  glori- 
ous kingdom,  making  Jerusalem  his  cap- 
ital, and  swaying  bis  sceptre  over  the 
world.  All  nations  and  people  will  be 
subject  to  him;  all  authority  will  be 
wielded  by  his  people  under  him.  (6)  Ac- 
cording to  the  other  view,  there  will  be 
a  spiritual  reign  of  the  Son  of  God  over 
the  earth ;  that  is,  the  principles  of  his 
religion  will  everywhere  prevail,  and  the 
righteous  will  rule,  and  the  laws  of  the 
Redeemer  will  be  obeyed  everywhere. 
There  will  be  such  aprevalence  of  his  gos- 
pel on  the  hearts  of  all — rulers  and  peo- 
ple; the  gospel  will  so  modify  all  laws, 
and  control  all  customs,  and  remove  all 
abuses,  and  all  the  forms  of  evil ;  men  will 
be  so  generally  under  the  influence  of  that 
gospel,  that  it  maj'  be  said  that  he  reigns 
on  the  earth,  or  that  the  government  ac- 
tuallj'  administered  is  liis. 

In  regard  to  these  different  views,  and 
to  the  true  interpretation  of  the  passage, 
it  may  be   remarked,  (1.}    that  we  ara 


B.  C.  555.]  CHAPTER   V  1) 

15  ^  I  Daniel  was  grieved  in  my 


300 


spirit  in  the  midst  of  ;/(?/' bod}',  and 

the  visions  of  my  head  troubled  me. 

IG  I  came  near  unto  one  of  them 

»  sheath.  2  Pe.  1. 14. 

not  to  look  for  the  literal  fulfihncnt  of 
this;  we  are  not  to  expect  that  what  is 
here  described  will  literally  occur.  The 
whole  is  evidently  a  symbolical  rejiresen- 
tation,  and  the  fulfilment  is  to  be  found 
in  something  that  the  symbol  would  pro- 
perly denote.  No  one  can  pretend  tliat 
there  is  to  be  an  actual  sitting  on  the 
throne,  by  one  in  the  form  of  an  old  man — 
'the  Ancient  of  days' — or  that  there  is  to 
be  a  literal  coming  to  him  by  one  'like 
the  Son  of  Man,'  to  receive  a  kingdom. 
But  if  one  part  of  the  representation  is 
not  to  be  literally  interpreted,  why  should 
the  other  be  ?  It  may  be  added,  that  it 
is  nowhere  .mid  that  this  would  literally 
occur.  (2)  All  that  is  fairly  implied 
hero  is  found  in  the  latter  interpreta- 
tion. Such  a  prevalence  of  the  princi- 
ples of  the  gospel,  would  meet  the  force 
of  the  language,  and  every  part  of 
the  vision  would  find  a  real  fulfilment  in 
that,  (a)  The  fact  that  it  proceeds  from 
God — represented  as  'the  Ancient  of 
days.'  (l)  The  fact  that  it  is  given  by 
him,  or  that  the  kingdom  is  made  over 
by  him  to  the  Messiah,  (c)  The  fact 
that  the  Messiah  would  have  such  a  king- 
dom ;  that  is,  that  ho  would  reign  on  the 
earth,  in  the  hearts  and  lives  of  men. 
(d)  The  fact  that  that  kingdom  would  be 
universal — extending  over  all  people. 
And  (e)  the  fact  that  it  would  bo  per- 
petual ;  that  is,  that  it  would  extend 
down  to  the  end  of  time,  or  the  consum- 
mation of  all  things  here,  and  that  it 
would  be  then  eternal  in  the  heavens.  For 
a  very  full  and  ample  illustration  of  this 
passage — so  full  and  ample  as  to  super- 
sede the  necessity  of  any  additional  illus- 
tration hero,  see  the  notes  on  ch.  ii.  H,  45. 
15.  /  Daniel  loas  grieved  in  my  spirit. 
That  is,  I  was  troubled ;  or  the  heart  was 
made  heavy  and  sad.  This  was  probably 
in  part  because  he  did  not  fully  under- 
stand the  meaning  of  the  vision,  and 
partly  on  account  of  the  fearful  and 
momentous  nature  of  that  which  was  in- 
dicated by  it.  So  the  apostle  John, 
(Rev.  v.  4),  says,  "  And  I  wept  much  be- 
cause no  man  was  found  worthy  to  open 
*nd  to  read  the  book."     ^  /"  tht  midst  of 


that  stood  by,  and  asked  him  the 
truth  of  all  this.  So  he  told  me, 
and  made  me  know  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  things. 

17  These  great  beasts,  which  are 


ray  bodt/.  Marg.,  as  in  the  Chald.,  sheath. 
The  body  is  undoubtedly  referred  to,  and 
is  so  called  as  the  envelope  of  the  mind — 
or  as  that  in  which  the  soul  is  inserted,  as 
the  sword  is  in  the  sheath,  and  I'rom 
which  it  is  drawn  out  by  death.  Tho 
same  metaphor  is  employed  by  Pliny: 
Donee  cremato  eo  inimici  remeanti  animce 
veliit  varjinam  ademerint.  So,  too,  a  cer- 
tain philosopher,  who  was  slighted  by 
Alexander  the  Great,  on  account  of  his 
ugly  face,  is  said  to  have  replied.  Corpus 
hominis  nil  est  nisi  vagina  gladii,  in  qua 
anima  tanqnam  in  vagina  reconditur. 
Geseniiis.  Comp.  Lengerke,  in  loc.  See 
also  Job  xxvii.  8,  "When  God  taketh 
awai/  his  soul;"  or  rather  draws  out  his 
soul,  as  a  sword  is  drawn  out  of  tho 
sheath.  Comp.  Notes  on  that  place.  See 
also  Buxtorfs  Lex.  Tal.  p.  1307.  Tho 
meaning  here  is  plain — that  Daniel  felt 
sad  and  troubled  in  mind,  and  that  this 
produced  a  sensible  effect  on  his  body. 
*^\  And  the  visiorts  of  my  head  troubled  me. 
The  head  is  here  regarded  as  the  seat  of 
the  intellect,  and  he  speaks  of  these  visions 
as  if  they  were  seen  by  the  head.  That 
is,  they  seemed  to  pass  before  his  eyes. 

10.  /  came  near  unto  one  of  them  that 
stood  by.  That  is,  to  one  of  the  angels 
who  appeared  to  stand  near  the  throne, 
ver.  10.  Comp.  ch.  viii.  13,  Zech.  iv.  4,  5, 
Rev.  vii.  13.  It  was  natural  for  Daniel 
to  suppose  that  the  angels  who  were  seen 
encircling  tho  throne,  would  be  able  to 
give  him  information  on  the  subject,  and 
the  answers  which  Daniel  received  show 
that  he  was  not  mistaken  in  his  expecta- 
tion. God  has  often  employed  angels  to 
communicate  important  truths  to  men,  or 

I  has  made  them  the  medium  of  communi- 
cating his   will.     Comp.   Rev.  i.  1,  Acts 

I  vii.  53,  Hob.  ii.  2.  ^  So  he  told  me,  and 
made  me  know  the  ititerptretation  of  the 
things.     He  explained  the  meaning  of  tho 

,  symbols  so  that  Daniel  understood  them. 

I  It  would  seem  probable  that  Daniel  has 
not  recorded  all  that  the  angels  commu- 
nicated rftpecting  the  vision,  but  ho  has 
preserved  so  much  that  we  may  under- 
stand its  general  signification. 

17.    These  great  beasts,  which' art  four, 


SIO 


DANIEL 

toJiich  shall 


[B.  C.  555. 


four,   are  four    kings 
a^'ise  out  of  the  earth. 

18  But  the  saints  of  the  ^Most 
High  shall  take  the  kingdom,  and 
a  High  ones,  i.  e.  things  or  places.  Ep.  1.3;  0. 12. 

ore  four  kings.  Four  kings  or  four  dy- 
nasties. There  is  no  reason  for  suppos- 
ing that  they  refer  to  individual  Jangs, 
but  the  obvious  meaning  is,  that  they  re- 
fer to  four  dominions  or  cmjnres  that 
would  succeed  one  another  on  the  earth. 
So  the  whole  representation  leads  us  to 
suppose,  and  so  the  passage  has  been  al- 
ways interpreted.  The  Latin  vulgate 
renders  it  regna;  the  Sept.  (iaaCKitai; 
Luther,  Keiche,  Lengerke,  Konigreiche. 
This  interpretation  is  confirmed,  also,  by 
ver.  23,  where  it  is  expressly  said  that 
'  the  fourth  beast  shall  be  the  fourth 
kingdom  upon  earth.'  See  also  ver.  24. 
^  Which  shall  arise  out  of  the  earth.  In 
ver.  2  the  beasts  are  represented  as  com- 
ing up  from  the  sea — the  emblem  of  agi- 
tated nations.  Here  the  same  idea  is 
presented  more  literally — that  they  would 
seem  to  spring  up  out  of  the  earth,  thus 
thrown  into  wild  commotion.  These  dy- 
nasties were  to  be  upon  the  earth,  and 
they  were  in  all  things  to  indicate  their 
earthly  origin.  Perhaps,  also,  it  is  de- 
signed by  these  words  to  denote  a  marked 
contrast  between  these  four  dynasties, 
and  the  one  that  would  follow — which 
would  be  of  heavenly  origin.  This  was 
the  general  intimation  which  was  given 
to  the  meaning  of  the  vision,  and  he  was 
satisfied  at  once  as  to  the  explanation,  so 
far  as  the  first  three  were  concerned,  but 
the  fourth  seemed  to  indicate  more  mys- 
terious and  important  events,  and  re- 
specting this  he  was  induced  to  ask  a 
more  particular  explanation. 

18.  But  the  saints  of  the  Ifost  High 
shall  take  the  kingdom.  That  is,  they 
shall  ultimately  take  possession  of  the 
rule  over  all  the  world,  aad  shall  control 
it  from  that  time  onward  to  the  end. 
This  is  the  grand  thing  which  the  vision 
is  designed  to  disclose,  and  on  this  it  was 
evidently  the  intention  to  fix  the  mind. 
Every  thing  before  was  preparatory  and 
suDordinate  to  this,  and  to  this  all  things 
tended.  The  phrase  rendered  the  Jlost 
Sigk-'-in  the  margin  'high  ones,  i.  e. 
thviga  or  places' — pjii'?5?. — is  in  the  plural 
fiumber,  and   means   literaly  high   ones. 


possess  the  kingdom  b  for  ever,  even 
for  ever  and  ever. 

19  Then  I  would  know  the  truth 
of  the  fourth  beast,  which  was  di« 
bRf.  3. 21. 

but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  refers 
here  to  God,  and  is  given  to  him  as  the 
word  Elohim  is  (Gen.  i.  1,  et  sae.),  to  de- 
note mjijesty  or  honor — pluralis  c^ccllen- 
tice.  The  word  rendered  saints  means 
the  holy,  and  the  reference  is  undoubtedly 
to  the  people  of  God  on  the  earth,  mean- 
ing hero  that  they  would  take  possession 
of  the  kingdom,  or  that  they  would  rule. 
When  true  religion  shall  everj'where  pre- 
vail, and  when  all  offices  shall  be  in  the 
hands  of  good  men — of  men  that  fear  God 
and  that  keep  his  commandments — in- 
stead of  being  in  the  hands  of  bad  men 
as  they  generally  have  been,  then  this 
prediction  will  be  accomplished  in  respect 
to  all  that  is  fairly  implied  in  it.  f  And 
possess  the  kingdom  fur  ever,  even  for  ever 
and  ever.  This  is  a  strong  and  emphatic 
declaration,  affirming  that  this  dominion 
will  bo  perpetual.  It  will  not  pass  awaj-, 
like  the  other  kingdoms,  to  be  succeeded  by 
another  one.  What  is  here  afiirmed,  as 
above  remarked,  will  be  true  if  such  a 
reign  should  continue  on  earth  to  the 
winding  up  of  all  things,  and  should  then 
'  be  succeeded  by  an  eternal  reign  of  holi- 
ness in  the  heavens.  It  is  not  necessary 
to  interpret  this  as  meaning  that  there 
would  be  literally  an  eternal  kingdom  on 
this  earth — for  it  is  everj-where  taught  in 
the  Scriptures  that  the  present  order  of 
things  will  come  to  a  close.  But  it  does 
seem  necessary  to  understand  this  as 
teaching  that  there  will  be  a  state  of  pre- 
valent righteousness  on  the  earth  here- 
after, and  that  when  that  is  introduced  it 
will  continue  to  the  end  of  time. 

19.  Then  I  iconld  knoic  the  truth  of  the 
fourth  least.  I  desired  to  know  particu- 
larly what  was  symbolized  by  that.  Ho 
appears  to  have  been  satisfied  with  the 
most  general  intimations  in  regard  to  the 
first  three  beasts,  for  the  kingdoms  repre- 
sented by  them  seemed  to  have  nothing 
very  remarkable.  But  it  was  different  in 
regard  to  the  fourth.  The  beast  itself 
was  so  remarkable — so  fierce  and  terrific  ; 
the  number  of  the  horns  was  so  great; 
the  springing  up  of  the  little  horn  was  sc 
surprising;  the   character  of  that  horn 


B.  C.  555.1 


L,i£APTEK  VII 


311 


verse  from  all  >  the  others,  exceeding 
dreadful,  whoso  teeth  were  of  iron, 
and  his  nails  of  brass  ;  tohich  de- 
voured, brake  in  pieces,  and  stamped 
the  residue  with  his  feet ; 

20  And  of  the  ten  horns  that  toere 
ill  his  head,  and  of  the  other  which 
came  up,  and   before  whom  three 

»  Those. 

was  so  unusual ;  the  judgment  passed  on 
It  was  so  solemn  ;  and  the  vision  of  one 
like  the  Son  of  Man  coming  to  take 
possession  of  the  kingdom — all  these 
things  were  of  so  fearful,  and  so  uncom- 
mon a  character,  that  the  mind  of  Daniel 
was  peculiarly  affected  in  view  of  them, 
and  he  sought  earnestly  for  a  further  ex- 
planation. In  the  description  that  Dan- 
iel here  gives  of  the  beast  and  the  horns, 
he  refers  in  the  main  to  the  same  circum- 
stances which  ho  had  before  described, 
but  ho  adds  a  few  which  he  had  before 
omitted,  all  tending  to  impress  the  mind 
more  deeply  with  the  fearful  character, 
and  the  momentous  import  of  the  vision 
— as  for  instance,  the  fact  that  it  had  nails 
of  brass,  and  made  war  with  the  saints. 
^  Which  was  diverse  from  all  the  others. 
Different  in  its  form  and  character : — so 
different  as  to  attract  particular  attention, 
and  to  leave  the  impression  that  some- 
thing very  peculiar  and  remarkable  was 
denoted  by  it.  Notes  ver.  7.  %  Exceed- 
ing dreadful.  Notes  ver.  7.  IT  And  his 
nails  of  brass.  This  circumstance  is  not 
mentioned  in  the  first  statement,  ver.  7. 
It  accords  well  with  the  other  j)art  of  the 
description  that  his  teeth  were  of  iron, 
and  is  designed  to  denote  the  fearful  and 
terrific  character  of  the  kingdom,  sym- 
bolized by  the  beast.  ^  "Which  devoured, 
&c.     See  Notes  on  ver.  7. 

20.  And  of  the  ten  horns,  &c.  See 
Notes  on  vs.  7,  8.  ^  Whose  look  was 
more  stout  than  his  fellows.  Literally, 
•  whose  aspect  was  greater  than  that  of 
its  companions.'  This  does  not  mean 
that  its  look  or  aspect  was  more  fierce  or 
severe  than  that  of  the  others,  but  that 
♦he  appearance  of  the  horns  was^reci^ec — 
2ti.  In  ver.  8,  this  is  described  as  a  '  little 
horn,'  and  to  understand  this,  and  recon- 
cile the  two,  we  must  suppose  that  the 
Beer  watched  this  as  it  grew  until  it  be- 
came the  largest  of  the  number.  Three 
fell  before  it,  and  it  outgrew  in  size  all 


fell ;  even  o/'that  horn  that  had  eyes, 
and  a  mouth  that  spake  very  great 
things,  whose  look  icas  more  stout 
than  his  fellows. 

21  I  beheld,  and  ''  the  same  horn 
made  war  with  the  saints,  and  pre- 
vailed against  them  ; 

22  Until  the   Ancient  of  days 

b  Re.  13.  7,  &c. 

the  others  until  it  became  the  most  pro- 
minent. This  would  clearly  denote  that 
the  kingdom  or  the  authority  referred  to 
by  this  eleventh  horn  would  bo  more  dis- 
tinct and  prominent  than  either  of  the 
others — would  become  so  conspicuous  and 
important  as  in  fact  to  concentrate  and 
embody  all  the  power  of  the  beast. 

21.  /  beheld,  and  the  same  horn  viade 
ivar  with  the  saints.  I  continued  to  look 
on  this  until  I  saw  war  made  by  this  horn 
with  the  people  of  God.  This  circum- 
stance, also,  is  not  referred  to  in  the  first 
description,  and  the  order  of  time  in  the 
description  would  seem  to  imply  that  the 
war  with  the  saints  would  bo  at  a  consi- 
derable period  after  the  first  appearance 
of  the  horn — or  would  bo  only  when  it 
had  grown  to  its  great  size  and  power. 
This  *  war'  might  refer  to  open  hostilities, 
carried  on  in  the  usual  manner  of  war ; 
or  to  persecution,  or  to  any  invasion 
of  the  rights  and  privileges  of  others. 
As  it  is  a  'war  with  the  saints'  it  would 
be  most  natural  to  refer  it  to  persecution. 
^  And  prevailed  against  them.  That  is, 
he  overcame  and  subdued  them.  He  was 
stronger  than  they  were,  and  they  were 
not  able  to  resist  him.  The  same  events 
are  evidently  referred  to,  and  in  almost 
similar  language — borrowed  prob.ably 
from  Daniel — in  Rev.  xiii.  5 — 7  :  "  And 
there  was  given  him  a  mouth  speaking 
great  things  and  blasphemies,  and  power 
was  given  unto  him  to  continue  forty  and 
two  months.  And  he  opened  his  mouth 
in  blasphemy  against  God,  to  blaspheme 
his  name,  and  his  tabernacle,  and  them 
that  dwell  in  heaven.  And  it  was  given 
him  to  make  war  with  the  saints,  and  to 
overcome  them :  and  power  was  given 
him  over  all  kindreds,  and  tongues,  and 
nations." 

22.  Until  the  Ancient  of  days  came. 
Notes  ver.  9.  That  is,  this  was  to  occur 
after  the  horn  grew  to  its  full  size ;  and 
(^ter  the  war  was  made  with  the  saints 


312 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  555. 


came,  and  judgment  was  given  to  [earth,  ■which  shall  be  diverse  from 
the  saints  of  the  Most  High;  and 
the  time  came  that  the  saints  pos- 
sessed the  kingdom. 

23  Thus  he  said,  The  fourth  beast 
shall   be  the  fourth  kingdom  upon 

and  they  had  been  overcome.  It  does 
not  affirm  that  this  would  occur  ■imme- 
diately,  but  that  at  some  subsequent  pe- 
riod the  Ancient  of  days  would  come, 
and  would  set  up  a  kingdom  on  the  earth, 
or  would  make  over  the  kingdom  to  the 
saints.  There  would  be  as  real  a  trans- 
fer and  as  actual  a  setting  up  of  a  pecu- 
liar kingdom,  as  if  God  himself  should 
appear  on  the  earth,  and  should  publicly 
make  over  the  dominion  to  them.  H  And 
judgment  was  (jiven  to  the  saints  of  the 
Most  Hiyh.  That  is,  there  was  a  solemn 
act  of  judgment  in  the  case  by  which  the 
kingdom  was  given  to  their  bands.  It 
was  as  real  a  transfer  as  if  there  had  been 
a  judgment  pronounced  on  the  beast,  and 
ho  had  been  condemned  and  overthrown, 
and  as  if  the  dominion  which  he  once 
had  should  be  made  over  to  the  servants 
of  the  Most  High.  ^  And  the  time  came 
that  the  saints  possessed  the  Icingdom. 
That  they  ruled  on  the  earth  ;  that  good 
men  made  and  administered  the  laws; 
that  the  principles  of  religion  prevailed — 
influencing  the  hearts  of  all  men,  and 
causing  righteousness  and  justice  to  be 
done.  The  universal  prevalence  of  true 
religion — in  controlling  the  hearts  and 
lives  of  men,  and  disposing  them  to  do 
what  in  all  circumstances  ought  to  be 
done,  would  be  a  complete  fulfilment  of 
all  that  is  here  said.  Thus  far  the  de- 
scription of  what  Daniel  saw,  of  which  he 
was  so  desirous  to  obtain  an  exijlanation. 
The  explanation  follows,  and  embraces 
the  remainder  of  the  chapter. 

23—27.  Thus  he  said,  kc.  That  is,  in 
explanation  of  the  fourth  symbol  which 
appeared — the  fourth  beast,  and  of  the 
events  connected  with  his  appearing. 
This  explanation  embraces  the  remainder 
of  the  chapter,  and  as  the  whole  subject 
appeared  difficult  and  momentous  to  Da- 
niel before  the  explanation,  so  it  may  bo 
said  to  be  in  many  respects  difficult,  and 
in  all  respects  momentous  still.  It  is 
a  question  on  which  expositors  of  the 
Scriptures  are  by  no  means  agreed,  to 
what  it  refers,  and  whether  it  has  been 
alreadj'  accomplished,  or  whether  it  ex- 


all  kingdoms,  and  shall  devour  the 
whole  earth,  and  shall  tread  it  down, 
and  break  it  in  pieces. 

24  And  the  ten  horns  out  of  this 
kingdom  are  ten  kings   that   shall 

tends  still  into  the  future ;  and  it  is  of  im- 
portance, therefore,  to  determine  if  pos- 
sible, what  is  its  true  meaning.  The  two 
points  of  inquiry  which  are  properly  be- 
fore us  are,  first.  What  do  the  words  of 
explanation  as  used  by  the  angel,  fairly 
imply  ;  that  is,  what,  according  to  the 
fair  interpretation  of  these  words,  would 
be  the  course  of  events  referred  to,  or 
what  should  we  naturally  expect  to  find 
as  actually  occurring  on  the  earth  in  the 
fulfilment  of  this;  and  secondly.  To  what 
events  the  prophecy  is  actually  to  be  ap- 
plied— whether  to  what  has  already  oc- 
curred, or  what  is  yet  to  occur;  whether 
we  can  find  anything  in  what  is  now  past 
which  would  be  an  accomplishment  of 
this,  or  whether  it  is  to  be  applied  to 
events  a  part  of  which  are  j'et  future. 
This  will  lead  us  into  a  statement  of  the 
j>oints  which  it  is  affirmed  would  occur  in 
regard  to  this  kingdom;  and  then  into  an 
inquiry  respecting  the  application. 

I.  What  is  fairly  implied  in  the  expla- 
nation  of  the  angel.  This  would  em- 
brace the  following  points  : 

(1)  There  was  to  be  a  fourth  kingdom 
on  the  earth  : — the  fourth,  least  shall  be  the 
fourth  kingdom  iijjon  earth,  ver.  23. 
This  was  to  succeed  the  other  three,  sym- 
bolized by  the  lion,  the  bear,  and  the  leo- 
pard. Ko  further  reference  is  made  to 
them,  but  the  characteristics  of  this  are 
fully  stated.  Those  characteristics,  which 
have  been  explained  in  the  Notes  on  ver. 
7,  are,  as  here  repeated,  (a)  that  it  would 
bo  in  important  respects  different  from 
the   others;  (6)  that  it  would  devour  or 

!  subdue  the  whole  earth ;  (c)  that  it  would 
tread  it  down,  and  break  it  in  pieces  : — 
;  that  is,  it  would  be  a  universal  dynasty, 
j  of  a  fierce  and  warlike  character,  that 
would  keep  the  whole  world  subdued  and 
subject  by  power. 

(2)  Out  of  this  sovereignty  or  domin- 
j  ion,  ten   powers  would    arise    (ver.  24) : 

and  the  ten  horns  out  of  this  kingdom  are 
ten  kings  that  shall  arise,  C'omp.  Notes 
on  ver.  7.  That  is,  they  would  spring 
j  out  of  this  one  dominion,  or  it  would  be 
i  broken  up  into  these  minor  sovereignties. 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER    VII 


313 


arise:  and  another  shall  rise  after!  25  And  he  shall  speak  great 
them  ;  and  he  shall  be  diverse  from  I  words  against  the  JMost  High,  and 
the  first,  and  he  shall  subdue  three  '  shall  wear  out  the  saints  of  the  Most 
kin2:s.  i  High,  and   think   to   change   times 


yet  all  manifestly  springing  from  the  one 
kingdom,  and  wielding  the  same  power. 
We  would  not  naturally  look  for  the  ful- 
filment of  this  in  a  succession  of  kings — 
for  that  would  have  been  symbolized  by 
the  beast  itself  representing  the  entire 
dominion  or  dynasty,  but  rather  to  a 
number  of  contemporaneous  powers  that 
had  somehow  sprung  out  of  the  one 
power,  or  that  now  possessed  and  wielded 
the  power  of  that  one  dominion.  If  the 
kingdom  here  referred  to  should  be  broken 
up  into  such  a  number  of  powers,  or  if  in 
any  way  these  powers  became  possessed 
of  this  authority,  and  wielded  it,  such  a 
fact  would  express  what  wo  are  to  expect 
to  find  in  this  kingdom. 

(3)  From  the  midst  of  these  sovereign- 
ties or  kingdoms  there  was  to  spring  up 
another  one  of  peculiar  characteristics, 
vs.  24,  25.  These  characteristics  are  the 
following  ;  (a]  That  it  would  spring  out 
of  the  clhers,  or  he,  as  it  were,  one  form 
of  the  administration  of  the  same  power — 
as  the  eleventh  horn  sprang  from  the 
same  source  as  the  ten,  and  we  are,  there- 
fore, to  look  for  the  exercise  of  this  power 
somehow  in  connection  with  the  same 
kingdom  or  dynasty,  (b)  This  would  not 
spring  up  contemporaneously  with  the 
ten,  but  would  '  after  them' — and  we  are 
to  look  for  this  power  as  in  some  sense 
succcedinc)  them,  (c)  It  would  be  small 
at  first — as  was  the  horn  (ver.  S),  and 
we  are  to  look  for  the  fulfilment  in  some 
power  that  wo^ld  be  feeble  at  first,  (d)  It 
would  grow  to  be  a  mighty  power — for 
the  little  horn  became  so  powerful  as  to 
pluck  up  three  of  the  others  (ver.  S), 
and  it  is  said  in  the  explanation  (ver. 
24),  that  'he  would  subdue  three  of 
the  kings.'  (e)  It  would  subdue  'three 
kings ;'  that  is,  three  of  the  ten,  and 
we  are  to  look  for  the  fulfilment  in  some 
manifestation  of  that  power  by  which, 
either  literally  three  of  them  were  over- 
thrown, or  by  which  about  one-third  of 
their  power  was  taken  away.  The 
mention  of  the  exact  number  of  'three,' 
however,  would  rather  seem  to  imply  that 
we  are  to  expect  some  such  exact  fulfil- 
ment, or  some  prostration  of  three  sove- 
•eignties  by  the  new  power  that  T'^uld 
27 


arise.  (/)  It  would  be  proud,  and  am- 
bitious, and  particularly  arrogant  against 
God: — 'and  he  shall  speak  great  word* 
against  the  Jfost  High,'  ver.  25.  The 
Chaldee  here  rendered  against — ix'?  — 
means,  literally,  at,  or  against  the  part 
o/iV,  and  then  against.  Vulg.  Contra.  Gr. 
Trpdj.  This  would  be  fulfilled  in  one  who 
would  blaspheme  God  directly ;  or  who 
would  be  rebellious  against  his  govern- 
ment and  authority;  or  who  would  com- 
plain of  his  administration  and  laws  ;  or 
who  would  give  utterance  to  hai'sh  and 
reproachful  words  against  his  real  claims. 
It  would  find  a  fulfilment  obviously  in 
an  open  opposer  of  the  claims  and  the 
authority  of  the  true  Ged ;  or  in  one  the 
whole  spirit  and  bearing  of  whose  pre- 
tensions might  be  fairly  construed  as  in 
fact  an  utterance  of  great  words  against 
him.  (g)  This  would  be  a  persecuting 
power: — '  atid  shall  wear  out  the  saints  of 
the  jVost  High,'  ver.  25.  That  is,  it  would 
be  characterized  by  a  persecution  of  the 
real  saints — of  those  who  were  truly 
the  friends  of  God,  and  who  served  him. 
{h)  It  would  claim  legislative  power,  the 
power  of  changing  established  customs 
and  laws  : — 'and  think  to  change  times  and 
j  laics,'  ver.  25.  The  word  rendered  think — 
13a — means  more  properly  to  hope;  and 
the  idea  here  is,  that  he  hopes  and  trusts 
to  be  able  to  change  times  and  laws. 
Vulg.,  Putahit  quod  possit  mutare  tern- 
]}ora,  &c.  The  state  of  mind  here  re- 
ferred to  would  be  that  of  one  who  would 
desire  to  produce  changes  in  regard  to 
the  times  .and  laws  referred  to,  and  who 
would  hope  that  he  would  be  able  to 
efiect  it.  If  there  was  a  strong  wish  to 
do  this,  and  if  there  was  a  belief  that 
in  any  way  he  could  bring  it  about, 
it  would  meet  what  is  implied  in  the 
use  of  the  word  here.  There  would 
be  the  exercise  of  some  kind  of  authority 
in  regard  to  existing  times  for  festivals, 
or  other  occasions,  and  to  existing  laws, 
and  there  would  be  a  purpose  so  to 
change  them  as  to  accomplish  his  own 
ends.  The  word  times — ]'rjt — would 
seem  to  refer  properly  to  some  stated  or 
designated  times — as  times  appointed  for 


314  DANIEL. 

and  laws :  and  they  shall  be  given 


[B.  C.  655. 


into  his  hands  until  a  time  and  times 
and  the  dividino;  of  time. 


festivals,  Ac.  Gesenius,  'time,  specially 
nil  appointed  time,  season.'  Eccl.  iii.  1 ; 
Neh.  ii.  6  ;  Esther  ix.  27,  31.  Lengerke 
renders  the  word  Fest-Zeiien — '  festival 
times,'  and  explains  it  as  meaning  the 
holy  times,  festival  days,  Lev.  xxiii.  2,  4, 
37,44.  The  allusion  is,  undoubtedly,  to 
such  periods  set  apart  as  festivals  or 
fasts — seasons  consecrated  to  the  services 
of  religion;  and  the  kind  of  jurisdiction 
which  the  power  here  referred  to  would 
hope  and  desire  to  set  up  would  be  to  have 
control  of  these  periods,  and  so  to  change 
and  alter  them  as  to  accomplish  his  own 
purposes — either  by  abolishing  those  in 
e.xistence,  or  by  substituting  others  in 
their  place.  At  all  times  these  seasons 
have  had  a  direct  connection  with  the 
state  and  progress  of  religion,  and  he  who 
has  power  over  them,  either  to  abolish 
existing  festivals,  or  to  substitute  others 
in  their  places,  or  to  appoint  new  festi- 
vals, has  an  important  control  over  the 
whole  subject  of  religion,  and  over  a  na- 
tion. The  word  rendered  laics  here — 
HT  — while  it  might  refer  to  any  law,  would 
more  properly  designate  laws  pertaining 
to  religion.  See  Dan.  vi.  6,  9,  13 ;  Ezra 
vii.  12,  21.  So  Lengerke  explains  it  as 
referring  to  the  laws  of  religion,  or  to 
religion.  The  kind  of  jurisdiction,  there- 
fore, referred  to  in  this  place,  would  be 
that  which  would  pertain  to  the  laws  and 
institutions  of  religion ;  it  would  be  a 
purpose  to  obtain  the  control  of  these;  it 
would  be  a  claim  of  right  to  abolish  such 
as  existed,  and  to  institute  new  ones  ;  it 
would  be  a  determination  to  exert  this 
power  in  such  a  way  as  to  promote  its 
own  ends.  {i)it  would  continue  for  a 
definite  period  : — and  they  shall  he  given 
into  his  hands  until  a  time  and  times  and 
the  dividing  of  a  time,  ver.  25.  They  ;  that 
is,  either  those  laws,  or  the  people,  the 
powers  referred  to.  Maurer  refers  this 
to  the  'saints  of  the  Most  High,'  as 
meaning  that  they  would  bo  delivered 
into  his  hands.  Though  this  is  not  de- 
signated expressly,  yet  perhaps  it  is 
the  most  natural  construction,  as  mean- 
ing that  he  would  have  jurisdiction  over 
the  saints  during  this  period,  and  if  so, 
then  the  meaning  is,  that  he  would  have 
absolute  control  over  them,  or  set  up  a 
iominion  over  them,  for  the  time  speci- 


fied— the  time,  and  times,  &c.  In  re- 
gard to  this  expression  'a  time  .and 
times,'  &c.,  it  is  unnecessary  to  say  that 
there  has  been  great  diversity  of  opinion 
among  expositors,  and  that  many  of  the 
controversies  in  respect  to  future  events 
turn  on  the  sense  attached  to  this  and  to 
the  similar  expressions  which  occur  in 
the  book  of  Revelation,  The  first  and 
main  inquiry  pertains,  of  course,  to  its 
literal  and  proper  signification.  The 
word  used  here  rendered  time,  times,  time — 
V'y'  V^iy. — ^^  a  word  which,  in  itself,  would 
no  more  designate  any  definite  and  fixed 
period  than  our  word  time  does.  See 
ch.  ii.  8,  9,  21,  iii.  5, 15,  iv.  16,  23,  25,  32, 
vii.  12.  In  some  of  these  instances,  the 
period  actually  referred  to  was  a  year, 
(ch.  iv.  16,  23),  but  this  is  not  necessarily 
implied  in  the  word  used,  but  the  limita- 
tion is  demanded  by  the  circumstances 
of  the  case.  So  far  as  the  word  is  con- 
cerned, it  would  denote  a  day,  a  week,  a 
month,  a  year,  or  a  larger  or  smaller 
division  of  time,  and  the  period  actually 
intended  to  be  designated  must  be  de- 
termined from  the  connection.  The 
Latin  Vulgate  is  indefinite — ad  temjnis  ; 
so  the  Greek,  £Uf  (caipoC;  so  the  Syriac, 
and  so  Luther — eine  Zeit,  and  so  Len- 
gerke, eine  Zeit.  The  phrase  'for  a 
time,'  expresses  accurately  the  meaning 
of  the  original  word.  The  word  rendered 
'  times'  is  the  same  word  in  the  plural, 
though  evidently  with  a  dual  significa- 
tion, Gesenius,  Le-v.  Lengerke,  in  loc. 
The  obvious  meaning  is  two  such  times 
as  is  designated  by  the  former  time.  The 
phrase  'and  the  dividing  of  a  time,' 
means  clearly  half  of  such  a  period. 
Thus,  if  the  period  denoted  by  a  'time' 
here  be  a  year,  the  whole  period  would 
be  three  years  and  a  half.  Designations 
of  time  like  this,  or  of  this  same  period, 
occur  several  times  in  the  prophecies 
(Daniel  and  Revelation),  and  on  their 
meaning  much  depends  in  regard  to  the 
interpretation  of  the  prophecies  pertain- 
ing to  the  future.  This  period  of  three 
j'ears  and  ahalf  equals  forty-two  months, 
or  twelve  hundred  and  sixty  days — the 
periods  mentioned  in  Rev.  xi.  2,  xii.  5, 
and  on  which  so  much  depends  in  the  in- 
terpretation of  that  book.  The  only 
question  of  importance  in  regard  to  the 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER    VII. 


3JL5. 


26  But  the  judgment  shall  sit,  and  they  shall  take  away  his  dominion, 


period  of  time  here  designated  is,  whether 
this  is  to  be  taken  literally  to  denote 
three  years  and  a  half,  or  whether  a  sym- 
bolical method  is  to  be  adopted,  by 
making  each  one  of  the  days  represent 
a  year,  thus  making  the  time  referred 
to,  in  fact,  twelve  hundred  and  sixty 
years.  On  this  question  expositors  are 
divided,  and  probably  will  continue  to  be, 
and  according  as  one  or  the  other  view  is 
adopted  they  refer  the  events  here  to  An- 
tiochus  Epiphanes,  or  to  the  Papal  power; 
or  perhaps  it  should  be  said  more  accu- 
rately, according  as  they  are  disposed  to 
refer  the  events  here  to  Antiochus  or  to 
the  Papacy,  do  they  embrace  one  or  the 
other  method  of  interpretation  in  regard 
to  the  meaning  of  the  days.  At  this 
point  in  the  examination  of  the  passage, 
the  only  object  is  to  look  at  it  exegetically  ; 
to  examine  it  as  lancjuatje  apart  from  the 
application,  or  unbiassed  by  any  purpose  of 
application ;  and  though  absolute  certainty 
cannot  perhaps  be  obtained,  yet  the  fol- 
lowing may  be  regarded  as  exegetically 
probable  : — (1)  The  word  time  may  be 
viewed  as  denoting  a  year ;  I  mean  a 
year  rather  than  a  week,  a  month,  or  any 
other  period — because  a  year  is  a  more 
marked  and  important  portion  of  time, 
and  because  a  day,  a  week,  a  month,  is  so 
short  that  it  cannot  be  reasonably  sup- 
posed that  it  is  intended.  As  there  is  no 
larger  natural  period  than  a  year — no 
cycle  in  nature  that  is  so  marked  and  ob- 
vious as  to  be  properly  suggested  by  the 
word  time,  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  any 
such  cycle  is  intended.  And  as  there  is  so 
much  particularity  in  the  language  used 
here,  'a  time,  and  times,  and  half  a  time,' 
it  is  to  bo  presumed  that  some  definite 
and  marked  period  is  intended,  and  that 
it  is  not  time  in  general.  It  may  be  pre- 
sumed, therefore,  that  in  some  sense  of 
the  term,  the  period  of  o.  year  is  referred 
to.  (2)  The  language  does  not  forbid 
the  application  to  a  literal  year,  and  then 
the  actual  time  designated  would  be  throe 
years  and  a  half.  No  laws  of  exegesis  ; 
nothing  in  the  language  itself  could  be 
regarded  as  violated,  if  such  an  interpre- 
tation were  given  to  the  language,  and  so 
far  as  tJds  point  is  concerned,  there  would 
be  no  room  for  debate.  (.'5)  The  same 
remark  may  be  made  as  to  the  symbolical 
application  of  the  language — taking  it  for 
\  mucb  longer  period  than  literally  three 


years  and  a  half;  that  is,  regarding  each 
day  as  standing  for  a  year,  and  thus  con- 
sidering it  as  denoting  twelve  hundred 
and  sixty  years.  This  could  not  be  shown 
to  be  a  violation  of  prophetic  usage,  or  to 
be  forbidden  by  the  nature  of  prophetic 
language,  because  nothing  is  more  com- 
mon than  symbols,  and  because  there  are 
actual  instances  in  which  such  an  inter- 
pretation must  be  understood.  Thus  in 
Ezckiel  iv.  6,  where  the  prophet  was  com- 
manded to  lie  upon  his  right  side  forty 
days,  it  is  expressly  said  that  it  was  sj'm- 
bolical  or  emblematical :  "  I  have  ap- 
pointed thee  each  day  for  a  year."  No 
one  can  doubt  that  it  would  be  strictly 
consistent  with  prophetic  usage,  to  sup- 
pose that  the  time  here  might  be  symboli- 
cal, and  that  a  longer  time  might  be  re- 
ferred to  than  the  literal  interpretation 
would  require.  (-4)  It  may  be  added  that 
there  are  some  circumstances,  even  con- 
sidering the  passage  with  reference  only 
to  the  interpretation  of  the  language,  and 
with  no  view  to  the  question  of  its  appli- 
cation, which  would  make  this  appear 
lirohahle.  Among  these  circumstances 
are  the  following  :  (n)  The  fact  that,  in 
the  prophecies,  it  is  unusual  to  designata 
the  time  literally.  Very  few  instances 
can  be  referred  to  in  which  this  is  done. 
It  is  commonly  by  some  .'iynibol ;  some 
mark;  some  peculiarity  of  the  time  or 
age  referred  to,  that  the  designation  is 
made,  or  by  some  symbol  that  may  bo 
understood  when  the  event  has  occurred. 
Ih)  This  designation  of  time  occurs  in 
the  midst  of  symbols — where  all  is  sym- 
bol— the  beasts,  the  horns,  the  little 
horn,  &c., — and  it  would  seem  to  be 
much  more  probable  that  such  a  method 
would  be  adopted  as  designating  the  time 
referred  to  than  a  literal  method,  (c)  It 
is  quite  apparent  on  the  mere  perusal  of 
the  passage  here  that  the  events  do  ac- 
tually extend  far  into  tho  future — ^far  be- 
yond what  would  be  denoted  by  the  brief 
period  of  three  and  a  half  years.  This 
will  be  considered  more  fully  in  another 
place  in  the  inquiry  as  to  the  meaning 
of  these  prophecies. 

(4)  A  fourth  point  in  the  explanation 
given  by  the  interpreter  to  Daniel  is,  that 
there  would  be  a  solemn  judgment  in  re- 
gard to  this  power,  and  that  the  domin- 
ion conceded  to  it  over  the  saints  for  a 
time  would  be  utterly  taken  away,  and 


,0 


DANIEL. 

I  v.i    o    ic.rtroy  it  unto 


[B.  C.  555. 


to    COIK  U  Uv 

the  ofiu. 

27  And  tiie  kingvilobi  «,raJ  domin- 
ion, and  the  greatness  Oi  thv.  king- 
dom under  the  whole  heavoii,  iJiall 
be  given  to  the  people  of  the  Saiuts 
of  the  Most  High,  whose  kinj^dum 
IS  an  everlasting  kingdom,  and  all 


the  power  itself  destroyed : — liit  the  judg- 
ment shall  sit,  and  they  shall  take  away 
his  dominion,  to  consitme,  and  to  destroy 
it  unto  the  end,  ver.  26.  That  is,  it 
shall  be  taken  away ;  it  shall  come  en- 
tirely to  an  end.  The  interpreter  does 
not  sa}'  by  whom  this  would  bo  done,  but 
he  asserts  the  fact,  and  that  the  destruc- 
tion of  tho  dominion  would  be  final. 
That  is,  it  would  entirely  and  forever 
cease.  This  would  be  done  by  an  act  of 
divine  judgment,  or  as  if  a  solemn  judg- 
ment should  be  held,  and  a  sentence  pro- 
nounced. It  would  be  OS  manifestly  an 
act  of  God  as  if  he  should  sit  as  a  judge, 
and  pronounce  sentence.  Sec  Notes  on 
vs.  9—11. 

(5)  And  a  fifth  point  in  tho  explana- 
tion of  the  interpreter  is,  that  the  domin- 
ion under  the  whole  heaven  would  be 
given  to  the  saints  of  the  Most  High,  and 
that  all  nations  should  serve  him  ;  that 
is,  that  there  would  be  a  univers.al  preva- 
lence of  righteousness  on  the  earth,  and 
that  God  would  reign  in  the  hearts  and 
lives  of  men,  (ver.  27.)  See  Notes  on  vs. 
13,  14. 

28.  Hitherto  is  the  end  of  the  matter. 
That  is,  the  end  of  what  I  saw  and  heard. 
This  is  the  sum  of  what  was  disclosed  to 
the  prophet,  but  he  still  says  that  he 
rneditated  on  it  with  profound  interest, 
and  that  he  had  much  solicitude  in  regard 
to  these  great  events.  The  words  ren- 
dered hitherto,  mean,  so  far,  or  thits  far. 
The  phrase  'end  of  the  matter,'  means 
'  the  close  of  the  saying  a  thing  ;'  that  is, 
this  was  all  tho  revelation  which  was 
made  to  him,  and  he  was  left  to  his  own 
meditations  respecting  it.  5[  -'^*  /"''  ""^ 
Daniel.  So  far  as  I  was  concerned;  or 
60  far  as  this  had  any  effect  on  me.  It 
was  not  unnatural,  at  the  close  of  this 
remarkable  vision,  to  state  the  effect  that 
it  had  on  himself.  ^  My  cogitations  much 
tronblcd  me.  My  thoughts  in  reg.ard  to 
it.  It  was  a  subject  which  he  could  not 
avoid  reflecting  on,  apd  which  could  pot 


^  dominions   shall   serve    and   obey 
him. 

28  Hitherto  is  the  end  of  the  mat- 
ter. As  for  me,  Daniel,  my  cogita- 
tions much  troubled  me,  and  my 
countenance  changed  in  me :  but  I 
kept  the  matter  in  my  heart. 

=>  or,  rulers. 


but-  produce  deep  solicitude  in  regard  to 
tLe  v'vents  which  were  to  occur.  Who 
ccuiJ  look  into  the  future  without  anx- 
ious aiid  ajvitating  thought?  These  events 
were  such  AS  to  engage  the  profoundest 
attention;  L.uch  as  to  fix  the  mind  in  so- 
lemn thought.  Comp.  Notes  on  Rev. 
V.  4.  *\  And  ii.y  countenance  changed  in 
me.  The  efiFecl  ox  these  revelations  de- 
picted thcmselvoi  on  my  countenance. 
The  prophet  does  aoi  say  in  what  w.ay — 
whether  by  makiui,-  bim  pale,  or  care- 
worn, or  anxious,  bat  ijerely  that  it  pro- 
duced a  change  in  his  ajt^.earance.  The 
Chaldee  is  brightness —  V\  -  -and  the  mean- 
ing would  seem  to  be  thai  hjs  bright  and 
cheerful  countenance  was  chdinged;  that 
is,  that  liis  bright  looks  wire  changed, 
either  by  becoming  pale  {Ges^nius,  Len- 
gerlce),  or  by  becoming  seri'ous  and 
I  thoughtful,  'l  But  I  kept  the  n.atier  in 
I  my  heart.  I  communicated  to  no  cne  the 
!  cause  of  my  deep  and  anxious  thoughts. 
He  hid  the  whole  subject  in  his  own 
mind,  until  he  thought  proper  to  make 
this  record  of  what  he  h.ad  seen  and  heard. 
Perhaps  there  was  no  one  to  whom  he 
could  communicate  the  matter  who  would 
credit  it:  perhaps  there  was  no  one  at 
court  who  would  sympathize  with  him; 
perhaps  he  thought  that  it  might  savour 
of  vanity  if  it  were  known  ;  perhaps  he 
felt  that  as  no  one  could  throw  any  new 
light  on  the  subject  there  would  be  no 
use  in  making  it  a  subject  of  conversa- 
tion ;  perhaps  he  felt  so  overpowered  that 
he  could  not  readily  converse  on  it. 

AVe  are  prepared  now,  having  gone 
through  with  an  exposition  of  this  chap- 
ter, as  to  the  meaning  of  the  symbols, 
the  words,  and  the  phrases,  to  endeavor 
to  ascertain  what  events  are  referred  to 
in  this  remarkable  prophecy,  and  to  ask 
what  events  it  was  designed  should  be 
portrayed.  And  in  reference  to  this  there 
are  but  two  opinions,  or  two  classes  of  in- 
terpretations, that  require  notice — that 
which  refers  it  primarily  and  exclusively 


B.  C.  555. J 


CHAPTER   VII. 


317 


to  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  that  which 
refers  it  to  the  rise  and  character  of  the 
Papal  power;  that  which  regards  the 
fourth  beast  as  referring  to  the  empire 
of  Alexander,  and  the  little  horn  to 
Antiochus,  and  that  which  regards  the 
fourth  beast  as  referring  to  the  Ro- 
man empire,  and  the  little  horn  to  the 
Papal  dominion.  In  inquiring  which  of 
these  is  the  true  interpretation,  it  will 
be  proper,  lirst,  to  consider  whether  it  is 
applicable  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes;  se- 
cond, whether  it  in  fact  finds  a  fulfilment 
in  the  Roman  empire  and  the  Papacy; 
and,  third,  if  such  is  the  proper  .applica- 
tion, what  are  wc  to  look  fur  in  the  future 
in  what  remains  unfulfilled  in  regard  to 
the  prophecy. 

I.  Tlie  ciuestion  whether  it  is  applica- 
ble to  the  case  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
A  large  class  of  interpreters  of  the  most 
respectable  character,  among  whom  are 
Lengerl^e,  Maurer,  Prof.  Stuart  (Hints  on 
the  Interpretation  of  Prophecy,  p.  86, 
seq  ;  also  Com.  on  Daniel,  pp.  205 — 211,) 
Eichhorn,  Bertholdt,  Bleek,  and  many  oth- 
ers, suppose  that  the  allusion  to  Antiochus 
is  clear,  and  that  the  primary,  if  not  the 
exclusive,  reference  to  the  prophecy  is  to 
him.  Prof.  Stuart  (Hints,  p.  86)  says, 
"  The  passage  in  Dan.  vii.  25  is  so  clear 
as  to  leave  no  reasonable  room  for  doubt. 
In  vs.  8,  20,  24,  the  rise  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  is  described:  for  the  fourth 
beast  is  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt  the 
divided  Grecian  dominion  which  suc- 
ceeded the  reign  of  Alexander  the  Great. 
From  this  dynasty  springs  Antiochus,  vs. 
8,  26,  who  is  most  graphically  described 
in  ver.  25  "as  one  who  shall  speak  great 
words  against  the  Most  High,"  kz. 

TheyVic/s  in  regard  to  Antiochus,  so  far 
as  they  are  necessary  to  be  known  in  the 
inquiry',  are  briefly  these  :  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes [the  Illustrious,  a  name  taken  on 
himself,  Prideaux,  III.  213),  was  the  son 
of  Antiochus  the  Great,  hut  succeeded 
his  brother,  Seleucus  Philopator,  who 
died  B.  C.  176.  Antiochus  reigned  over 
Syria,  the  capitol  of  which  was  Antioch, 
on  the  Orontes,  from  B.  C.  176  to  B.  C.  | 
164.  His  character,  as  that  of  a  cruel ! 
tyrant,  and  a  most  blood-thirsty  and  bit- 
ter enemy  of  the  Jews,  is  fully  detailed  j 
in  the  first  and  second  Book  of  Macca- 
bees. Comp.  also  Prideaux,  Con.  Vol. 
III.  213—2.34.  The  facts  in  the  case 
of  Antioclius,  so  far  as  they  are  sup- 
posed to  bear  on  the  application  of  the 
27* 


prophecy  before  us,  are  thus  stated  by 
Prof.  Stuart  (Hints  on  the  Interpretation 
of  Prophecy,  pp.  89,  90) ;  "In  the  year 
168  before  Christ,  in  the  month  of  May, 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  was  on  his  way  to 
attack  Egypt,  and  ho  detached  Apol- 
lonius,  one  of  his  military  confidents, 
with  22,000  soldiers,  in  order  to  subdue 
and  plunder  Jerusalem.  The  mission  was 
executed  with  entire  success.  A  tcnible 
slaughter  was  made  of  the  men  at  Jerusa- 
leni,  and  a  large  portion  of  the  women  ami 
children  being  made  captives,  were  sold 
and  treated  as  slaves.  The  services  of 
the  temple  were  interrupted,  and  its  joy- 
ful feasts  were  turned  into  mourning. 
1  Mac.  i.  37—39.  Soon  after  this  the 
Jews  in  general  were  compelled  to  cat 
swine's  flesh,  and  to  sacrifice  to  idols.  In 
December  of  that  same  year,  the  temple 
was  profaned  by  introducing  the  statue 
of  Jupiter  Olympius;  and  on  the  25th  of 
that  month  sacrifices  were  offered  to  that 
idol  on  the  altar  of  Jehovah.  Just  three 
years  after  this  last  event,  viz.  Dec.  25, 
105  B.  C.  the  temple  was  expurgated  by 
Judas  Maccabeus,  and  the  worship  of 
Jehovah  was  restored.  Thus  three  years 
and  a  half,  or  almost  exactly  this  period, 
passed  away,  while  Antiochus  had  com- 
plete possession  and  control  of  every- 
thing in  and  around  Jerusalem  and  the 
temple.  It  may  be  noted,  also,  that  just 
three  years  passed,  from  the  time  when 
the  profanation  of  the  temple  was  carried 
to  its  greatest  height,  viz.,  by  sacrificing 
to  the  statue  of  Jupiter  Olj'mpius  on  the 
altar  of  Jehovah,  down  to  the  time  when 
Judas  renewed  the  regular  worship.  I 
mention  this  last  circumstance  in  order 
to  account  for  the  three  years  of  Antio- 
chus' profanations,  which  are  named  as 
the  period  of  them  in  Josephus,  Ant.  xii. 
7,  ^  6.  This  period  tallies  exactly  with 
the  time  during  which  the  profanation  as 
consummated  was  carried  on,  if  we  reckon 
down  to  the  period  when  the  temple  wor- 
ship was  restored  by  Judas  Maccabeus. 
But  in  Proem,  ad  Bell.  Jud.  ^  7,  and  Bell. 
Jud.  L.  1,  ^  1,  Josephus  reckons  3J 
j'cars  as  the  period  during  which  Antio- 
chus ravaged  Jerusalem  and  Judah." 

In  regard  to  this  statement,  while  tne 
general  facts  are  correct,  there  are  some 
additional  statements  which  should  be 
made,  to  determine  as  to  its  real  bearing 
on  the  case.  The  act  of  detaching  Apollo- 
nius  to  attack  Jerusalem  was  not,  as  is 
stated  in  this   extract,  when   Antiochm 


318 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  555. 


fftks  on  his  way  to  Egypt,  but  was  on  his 
return  from  Egypt,  and  was  just  two  years 
after  Jerusalem  bad  been  taken  by  Anti- 
ochus.  Prideaux,  III.  239.  The  occasion 
of  liis  detaching  Apollonius,  was  that 
Antioehus  was  enraged  because  ho  had 
been  defeated  in  Egypt  by  the  Romans, 
and  resolved  to  vent  all  his  wrath  upon 
the  Jews,  who,  at  that  time,  had  given 
him  no  particular  offence.  When,  two 
years  before,  Antioehus  had  himself  taken 
Jerusalem,  he  slew  forty  thousand  per- 
sons; he  took  as  many  captives,  and  sold 
them  for  slaves  ;  he  forced  himself  into 
the  temple,  and  entered  the  most  holy 
place;  he  caused  a  great  sow  to  be  offered 
on  the  altar  of  burnt-ofifering,  to  show  his 
contempt  for  the  temple  and  the  Jewish 
religion ;  he  sprinkled  the  broth  over 
every  part  of  the  temple  for  the  purpose 
of  polluting  it;  he  plundered  the  temple 
of  the  altar  of  incense,  the  shew-bread 
table,  and  the  golden  candlestick,  and 
then  returned  to  Antioch,  having  ap- 
pointed Philip,  a  Phrygian,  a  man  of  a 
cruel  and  barbarous  temper,  to  be  gov- 
ernor of  the  Jews.  Prideaux,  iii.  231. 
When  Apollonius  again  attacked  the  city, 
two  years  afterwards,  ho  waited  quietly 
until  the  Sabbath,  and  then  made  his  as- 
sault, lie  filled  the  city  with  blood,  set 
it  on  fire,  demolished  the  houses,  pulled 
drwn  the  walls,  built  a  strong  fortress 
over  against  the  temple,  from  which  the 
garrison  could  fall  on  all  who  should  at- 
tempt to  go  to  worship.  From  this  time 
'the  temple  became  deserted,  and  the 
daily  sacrifices  were  omitted,'  until  the 
service  was  restored  by  Judas  Maccabeus, 
three  years  and  a  half  after.  The  time 
during  which  this  continued  was,  in  fact, 
just  three  years  and  a  half,  until  Judas 
Maccabeus  succeeded  in  expelling  the 
heathen  from  the  temple  and  from  Jeru- 
salem, when  the  temple  was  purified,  and 
was  solemnly  reconsecrated  to  the  wor- 
ship of  God.  See  Prideaux,  Con.  III. 
240,  241,  and  the  authorities  there  cited. 
Now,  in  reference  to  this  interpretation, 
Bupposing  that  the  prophecy  relates  to 
Antioehus,  it  must  be  admitted  that  there 
are  coincidences  which  are  remarkable, 
and  it  is  on  the  ground  of  these  coinci- 
dences that  the  prophecy  has  been  ap- 
plied to  him.  These  circumstances  are 
such  as  the  following:  (a)  The  general 
character  of  the  authority  that  would  ex- 
ist as  denoted  by  the  'little  horn,'  as 
Uiat  of  severity  and  cruelty.     None  could 


be  better  fitted  to  represent  that  than  the 
character  of  Antioehus  Epiphanes.  Comp. 
Prideaux,  Con.  III.  213,  214.  (6)  His 
arrogance  and  blasphemy  —  'speaking 
great  words  against  the  Most  High.' 
Nothing  is  easier  than  to  find  what  would 
bo  a  fulfilment  of  this  in  the  character  of 
Antioehus — in  his  sacrilegious  entrance 
into  the  mostholyplaces;  in  his  setting  up 
the  statue  of  Jupiter;  in  his  offering  a 
swine  as  a  sacrifice  on  the  great  altar;  in 
his  sprinkling  the  broth  of  a  swine  on  the 
temple  in  contempt  of  the  Hebrews  and 
their  worship,  and  in  his  causing  the  daily 
sacrifice  at  the  temple  to  cease,  (c)  His 
making  war  with  the  'saints,'  and  'wear- 
ing out  the  saints  of  the  Most  High' — 
all  this  covild  be  found  accomplished  in 
the  wars  which  Antioehus  waged  against 
the  Jews  in  the  slaughter  of  so  many 
thousands,  and  in  sending  so  many  into 
hopeless  slavery,  (d)  His  attempt  to 
'  change  times  and  laws' — this  could  be 
found  to  have  been  fulfilled  in  the  case 
of  Antioehus — in  his  arbitrary  character, 
and  in  his  interference  with  the  laws  of 
tho  Hebrews,  (c)  The  time,  as  above 
stated,  is  the  most  remarkable  coinci- 
dence. If  this  is  7iot  to  be  regarded 
as  referring  exclusively  to  Antioehus  it 
must  be  explained  on  one  of  two  sup- 
positions— either  that  it  is  one  of  those 
coincidences  which  luill  be  found  to  hap- 
pen in  history — as  coincidences  happen 
in  dreams;  or  as  having  a  double  refer- 
ence— intended  to  refer  primarily  to  An- 
tioehus, but  in  a  secondary  and  more  im- 
portant sense  referring  also  to  other 
events  having  a  strong  resemblance  to 
this  ;  or,  in  other  words,  that  the  language 
was  designedly  so  couched  as  to  relate  to 
two  similar  classes  of  events.  It  is  not 
to  be  regarded  as  very  remarkable,  how- 
ever, that  it  is  possible  to  find  a  fulfil- 
ment of  these  predictions  in  Antioehus, 
though  it  be  supposed  that  the  design 
was  to  describe  the  Papacy,  for  some  of 
tho  expressions  are  of  so  general  a  char- 
acter that  they  could  be  applied  to  many 
events  which  have  occurred,  and,  from 
the  nature  of  the  case,  there  were  strong 
points  of  resemblance  between  Antioehus 
and  the  Papal  power.  It  is  not  abso- 
lutely necessary,  therefore,  to  suppose 
that  this  had  reference  to  Antioehus  Epi- 
phanes, and  there  are  so  many  ohjectiont 
to  this  view  as  to  make  it,  it  seems  to  me, 
morally  impossible   that  it  should   havo 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER   VII 


319 


bad  such  a  reference.     Among  these  ob- 
jections are  the  following : 

(1)  This  interpretation  makes  it  neces- 
sary to  divide  the  kingdom  of  the  Medes 
and  Persians,  and  to  consider  them  two 
kingdoms,  as  Eiehhorn,  Jahn,  Dereser,  De 
Wette,  and  Bleek,  do.  In  order  to  this 
interpretation,  the  following  are  the  king- 
doms denoted  by  the  four  beasts — by  the 
first,  the  Chaldee ;  by  the  second,  the 
Medish  ;  by  the  third,  the  Persian  ;  and  by 
the  fourth,  the  Macedonian,  or  the  Mace- 
donian-Asiatic kingdom  under  Alexander 
the  Great.  But  to  say  nothing  now  of 
any  other  difficulties,  it  is  an  insuperable 
objection  to  this,  that  so  far  as  the  king- 
doms of  tho  Medes  and  Persians  are  men- 
tioned in  Scripture,  and  so  far  as  they 
play  any  part  in  the  fulfilment  of  pro- 
phecy, they  are  always  mentioned  as  one. 
They  appear  as  one;  they  act  as  one; 
they  are  regarded  as  one.  The  kingdom 
of  the  Medes  does  not  appear  until  it  is 
united  with  that  of  the  Persians,  and 
this  remark  is  of  special  importance  when 
they  are  spoken  of  as  succeedinij  the  king- 
dom of  Babylon.  The  kingdom  of  the 
Medes  was  contemporaneous  with  that  of 
Babjion  ;  it  was  the  Medo-Persian  king- 
dom that  was  in  any  proper  sense  the  suc- 
cessor of  that  of  Babjion,  as  described  in 
these  symbols.  The  kingdom  of  the  Medes, 
as  Hengstenberg  well  remarks,  could  in  no 
sense  be  said  to  have  succeeded  that  of 
Babylon  any  longer  than  during  the  reign 
of  Cyaxares  II.,  after  the  taking  of  Baby- 
lon; and  even  during  that  short  period  of 
two  years,  the  government  was  in  fact  in 
the  hand  of  Cyrus.  Die  Authentic  des 
Daniel,  p.  200.  Schlosser,  p.  243,  says 
'the  kingdom  of  the  Medes  and  Persians 
is  to  be  regarded  as  in  fact  one  and  the 
same  kingdom,  only  that  in  tho  change 
of  the  dynasty  another  branch  obtained 
the  authority.'  See  particularly  Rosen- 
muller,  Alterthumkuude,  i.  200,  201. 
These  two  kingdoms  are  in  fact  always 
blended — their  laws,  their  customs,  their 
religion,  and  they  are  mentioned  as  one. 
Comp.  Esther  i.  3,  18,  19;  x.  2;  Dan.  v. 
28;  vi.  8,  12,  15. 

(2)  In  order  to  this  interpretation,  it  is 
necessary  to  divide  the  empire  founded 
by  Alexander,  and  instead  of  regarding 
it  as  one,  to  consider  that  which  ex- 
isted when  he  reigned  as  one,  and  that 
of  Antiochus,  one  of  the  successors  of 
Alexander,  as  another.  This  opinion  is 
maintained  by  Bertholdt,  who  supposes 


that  the  first  beast  represented  the  Baby- 
lonian kingdom  ;  the  second,  the  king- 
dom of  the  Modes  and  Persians  ;  the  third, 
that  of  Alexander,  and  the  fourth  the 
kingdoms  that  sprang  out  of  that.  In 
order  to  this  it  is  necessary  to  sup- 
pose that  the  four  heads  and  wings,  and 
the  ten  horns,  equally  represent  that  king- 
dom, or  sprang  from  it — the  four  heads, 
the  kingdom  when  divided  at  the  death 
of  Alexander,  and  the  ten  horns  powers 
that  ultimately  sprang  up  from  the  same 
dominion.  But  this  is  contrary  to  tho 
whole  representation  in  regard  to  the 
Asiatic-Macedonian  empire.  In  ch.  viii. 
8,  9,  where  there  is  an  undoubted  refer- 
ence to  that  empire,  it  is  said  "  the  he- 
goat  waxed  very  great,  and  when  he  was 
strong  tho  great  horn  was  broken,  and 
from  it  came  up  four  notable  ones,  toward 
the  four  winds  of  heaven.  And  out  of 
one  of  them  came  forth  a  little  horn, 
which  waxed  exceeding  great,  toward  tho 
South,"  &c.  Hero  is  an  undoubted  allu- 
sion to  Alexander,  and  to  his  followers,  and 
particularly  to  Antiochus,  but  no  mention 
of  any  such  division  as  is  necessary  to  be 
supposed  if  the  fourth  beast  represents  the 
power  that  succeeded  Alexander  in  the 
East.  In  no  placo  is  the  kingdom  of  the 
successors  of  Alexander  divided  from  his 
in  the  same  sense  in  which  the  kingdom 
of  the  Medes  and  Persians  is  from  that 
of  Babylon,  or  tho  kingdom  of  Alexander 
from  that  of  the  Persians.  Comp.  Heng- 
stenberg, as  above,  pp.  203 — 205. 

(3)  The  supposition  that  the  fourth 
beast  represents  either  the  kingdom  of 
Alexander,  or,  according  to  Bertholdt  and 
others,  the  successors  of  Alexander,  by 
no  means  agrees  with  the  character  of 
that  beast  as  compared  with  the  others. 
That  beast  was  far  more  formidable,  and 
more  to  be  dreaded,  than  either  the 
others.  It  had  iron  teeth  and  brazen 
claws  ;  it  stamped  down  all  before  it,  and 
broke  all  to  pieces,  and  manifestly  re- 
presented a  far  more  fearful  dominion 
than  either  of  the  others.  The  same  is 
true  in  regard  to  the  parallel  representa- 
tion in  ch.  ii.  33,  40,  of  tho  fourth  king- 
dom represented  by  the  legs  and  feet  of 
iron,  as  more  terrific  than  either  of  those 
denoted  by  the  gold,  the  silver,  or  the 
brass.  But  this  representation  by  no 
means  agrees  with  the  character  of  the 
kingdom  of  either  Alexander  or  bis  suc- 
cessors, and  in  fact  would  not  be  true  of 
than.     It  would  agree  well,  as  wo  shall 


320 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  555. 


see,  with  the  Roman  power,  even  as  con- 
trasted with  that  of  Babylon,  Persia,  or 
Macedon,  but  it  is  not  the  representation 
which  would,  with  jiropriety,  be  given 
of  the  empire  of  Alexander,  or  his  suc- 
cessors, as  contrasted  with  thoso  which 
preceded  them.  Comp.  Ilengstenberg, 
as  above,  pp.  203 — 207.  Moreover,  this 
does  not  agree  with  what  is  expressly 
said  of  this  power  that  should  succeed 
that  of  Alexander,  in  a  passage  un- 
doubtedly referring  to  it,  in  ch.  viii.  22, 
where  it  is  said,  "  Is'ow  that  being  broken, 
whereas  four  stood  up  for  it,  four  king- 
doms shall  stand  up  out  of  the  nation, 
hut  not  in  his  2)owei:" 

(4)  On  this  supposition,  it  is  impossible 
to  determine  who  are  meant  by  the  'ten 
horns'  of  the  fourth  beast  (ver.  7),  and 
the  '  ten  kings'  (ver.  24,)  that  are  repre- 
sented by  these.  All  the  statements  in 
Daniel  that  refer  to  the  Macedonian 
kingdom  (ch.  vii.  G,  viii.  8,  22),  imply 
that  the  Macedonian  empire  in  the  East, 
when  the  founder  died,  would  be  divided 
into  four  great  powers  or  monarchies — 
in  accordance  with  what  is  well-known  to 
have  been  the  fact.  But  who  are  the  ten 
kings  or  sovereignties  that  were  to  exist 
under  this  general  Macedonian  power,  on 
the  supposition  that  the  fourth  beast  re- 
presents this?  Bertholdt  supposes  that 
the  ten  horns  are  '  ten  Syrian  kings,' 
and  that  the  eleventh  little  horn  is  An- 
tiochus  Epiphanes.  The  ncnncs  of  these 
kings,  according  to  Bertholdt,  (pp.  432, 
433,)  are  Seleucus  Kicator,  Antiochus 
Soter,  Antiochus  Theos,  Seleucus  Cal- 
linicus,  Seleucus  Ceraunos,  Antiochus 
the  Great,  Seleucus  Philopator,  Helio- 
dorus,  Ptolemy  Philometor,  and  Deme- 
trius. So  also  Prof.  Stewart,  Com.  on 
Dan.  p.  208.  But  it  is  impossible  to 
make  out  this  exact  number  of  S>/rian 
kings  from  history,  to  say  nothing  now 
of  the  improbability  of  supposing  that 
their  power  was  represented  by  the 
fourth  beast.  These  kings  were  not  of 
the  same  dynasty,  of  Sj-ria,  of  Mace- 
donia, or  of  Egypt,  but  the  list  is 
made  up  of  different  kingdoms.  Gro- 
tius  (u!  ^oc.)  forms  the  catalogue  often 
kings  out  of  the  lists  of  the  kings  of 
Syria  and  Egypt — five  out  of  one,  and 
five  out  of  the  other  ;  but  this  is  mani- 
festly contrary  to  the  intention  of  the 
prophecy,  which  is  to  represent  them 
as  springing  out  of  one  and  the  same 
power.     It  is  a  further  objection  to  this 


view,  that  these  are  lists  of  successive 
kings — rising  up  one  after  the  other; 
whereas  the  representation  of  the  ten 
horns  would  lead  us  to  sujipose  thnt  they 
existed  siinvltaiieousl)/ J-  or  that  somehow 
there  were  ten  powers  that  sprang  out  of 
the  one  great  jjower  represented  by  the 
fourth  beast. 

(5)  Equally  difiBcult  is  it,  on  this  sup- 
position, to  know  who  are  intended  by 
the  '  three  horns'  that  were  plucked  up 
by  the  little  horn  that  sprang  up  among 
the  ten,  ver.  8.  Grotius,  who  regards  the 
'little  horn'  as  representing  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  supposes  that  the  three  horns 
were  his  elder  brothers,  Seleucus,  Deme- 
trius the  son  of  Seleucus,  and  Ptolemy 
Philopator,  king  of  Egypt.  But  it  is  an 
insuperable  objection  to  this  that  the 
three  kings  mentioned  by  Grotius  are  not 
all  in  his  list  of  ten  kings,  neither  Pto- 
lemy Philometor  (if  Philometor  be  meant), 
nor  Demetrius  being  of  the  number. — 
Newton  on  the  Proph.,  p.  211.  Neither 
were  they  plucked  up  by  the  roots  by  An- 
tiochus, or  by  his  order.  Seleucus  was 
poisoned  by  his  treasurer,  Heliodorus, 
whose  aim  it  was  to  usurp  the  crown  fee 
himself,  before  Antiochus  came  from 
Rome,  where  he  had  been  detained  as  a 
hostage  for  several  years.  Demetrius 
lived  to  dethrone  and  murder  the  son  of 
Antiochus,  and  succeeded  him  in  the 
kingdom  of  Egypt.  Ptolemy  Philopator 
died  king  of  Egypt  almost  thirty  years 
before  Antiochus  came  to  the  throne  of 
Syria;  or  if  Ptolemy  Philometor,  as  is 
most  probable,  was  meant  by  Grotius, 
though  he  suffered  much  in  the  wars  with 
Antiochus,  yet  he  survived  him  about 
eighteen  years,  and  died  in  possession  of 
the  crown  of  Egypt.  Newton  tit  piipra. 
Bertholdt  supposes  that  the  three  kings 
were  Heliodorus,  who  poisoned  Seleucus 
Philopator,  and  sought,  by  the  help  of  a 
party,  to  obtain  the  throne  ;  Ptolemy  Phi- 
lometor, king  of  Egypt,  who,  as  sister's 
son  to  the  king,  laid  claim  to  the  throne; 
and  Demetrius,  who,  as  son  of  a  former 
king,  was  legitimate  heir  to  the  throne. 
But  there  are  two  objections  to  this  view  : 
(a)  That  the  representation  by  the  pro- 
phet is  of  actual  kings — which  these  were 
not ;  and  (6)  that  Antiochus  ascended  the 
throne  peaceahli/  ;  Demetrius,  who  would 
have  been  regarded  as  the  king  of  Syria, 
not  being  able  to  make  his  title  good,  and 
was  detained  as  a  hostage  at  Rome. 
Hengstenberg,  pp.  2P7,  203.    Prof.  Stuart, 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER   VII. 


321 


Com.  on  Dan.,  pp.  20S,  209,  supposes  that 
the  three  kings  referred  to  were  Heliodo- 
rus,  Ptok'iny  Pliilomctor,  and  Deme- 
trius I. ;  but  in  regard  to  these  it  should 
bo  observed,  that  they  were  mere preteiid- 
eis  to  the  throne,  whereas  the  text  in 
Daniel  supposes  that  they  would  be  actual 
kings.     Comp.  Ifengstenberg,  p.  208. 

(G)  The  time  hero  mentioned,  on  the 
supposition  that  literally  three  years  and 
a  half  (ver.  25)  are  intended,  does  not 
agree  with  the  actual  dominion  of  Antio- 
chus.  In  an  undoubted  reference  to  hira 
in  ch.  viii.  13,  14,  it  is  said  that  '  the  vis- 
ion concerning  the  daily  sacrifice,  and 
the  transgression  of  desolation,'  would 
bo  '  unto  two  thousand  and  three  hun- 
dred d.ays ;  then  shall  the  sanctuary  be 
cleansed;'  that  is,  one  thousand  and  forty 
days,  or  some  two  years  and  ten  months 
more  than  the  time  mentioned  here.  I  am 
aware  of  the  difficulty  of  explaining  this 
(see  Prof.  Stuart,  Hints  on  the  Interpre- 
tation of  Prophecy,  p.  98,  scq.),  and  the 
exact  meaning  of  the  passage  in  ch.  viii. 
13,  14,  will  come  up  for  consideration 
hereafter;  but  it  is  an  objection  of  some 
force  to  the  application  of  the  'time,  and 
times,  and  dividing  of  a  time'  (ver.  25) 
to  Antiochus,  that  it  is  not  the  same  time 
which  is  applied  to  him  elsewhere. 

(7)  And  one  more  objection  to  this  ap- 
plication is,  that,  in  the  prophecj',  it  is 
said  that  he  who  was  represented  by  the 
'little  horn,'  would  continue  till  'the  An- 
cient of  days  should  sit,'  and  evidently 
till  the  kingdom  should  be  taken  by  the 
one  in  the  likeness  of  the  Son  of  Man,  vs. 
9,  10,  13,  14,  21,  22,  26.  But  if  this  re- 
fers to  Antiochus,  then  these  events  must 
refer  to  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  and 
to  the  setting  up  of  his  kingdom  in  the 
world.  Yet,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  Antio- 
chus died  about  1(54  years  before  the  Sa- 
viour came,  and  there  is  no  way  of  show- 
ing that  he  continued  until  the  Messiah 
came  in  the  flesh. 

These  objections  to  the  opinion  that 
this  refers  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  seem 
to  me  to  be  insuperabLe 

II.  The  question  whether  it  refers  to 
the  Roman  empire  and  the  Papal  power. 
The  fiiir  inquiry  is,  whether  the  things 
referred  to  in  the  vision  actually  find  such 
a  correspondence  in  the  Roman  empire 
%nd  the  Papacy,  that  they  would  fairly 
represent  them  if  the  symbols  had  been 
made  use  of  after  the  events  occurred. 
Are  they  sich  as  we  might  properly  use 


now  as  describing  the  portions  of  those 
events  that  are  passed,  on  the  supposi- 
tion that  the  reference  was  to  those 
events?  To  determine  this,  it  will  bo 
proper  to  refer  to  the  things  in  the  sym- 
bol, and  to  inquire  whether  events  cor- 
responding to  them  have  actually  occurred 
in  the  Roman  empire  and  the  Papacy. 
Recalling  the  exposition  which  has  been 
above  given  of  the  explanation  furnished 
by  the  angel  to  Daniel,  the  things  there 
referred  to  will  find  an  ample  and  a  strik- 
ing fulfilment  in  the  Roman  empire  and 
the  Papal  power. 

(1)  The  fourth  kingdom,  symbolized  by 
the  fourth  beast,  is  accurately  represented 
by  the  Roman  power.  This  is  true  in 
regard  to  the  place  which  that  power 
would  occupy  in  the  history  of  the  world, 
on  the  supposition  that  the  first  three  re- 
ferred to  the  Babj'lonian,  the  Mcdo-Per- 
sian,  and  the  Macedonian.  On  this  sup- 
position there  is  no  need  of  regarding  the 
Medo-Persian  empire  as  divided  into  two, 
represented  by  two  symbols;  or  the  king- 
dom founded  by  Alexander — the  Asiatic- 
Macedonian — as  distinct  from  that  of  his 
successors.  As  the  Medo-Persian  was  in 
fact  one  dominion,  so  was  the  Macedonian 
under  Alexander,  and  in  the  form  of  the 
four  dynasties  into  which  it  was  divided 
on  his  death,  and  down  to  the  time  when 
the  whole  was  subverted  by  the  Roman 
conquests.  On  this  supposition,  .also, 
everything  in  the  symbol  is  fulfilled. 
The  fourth  beast,  so  mighty,  so  terrific, 
so  powerful,  so  unlike  all  the  others — 
armed  with  iron  teeth,  and  with  claws  of 
brass — trampling  down  and  stninping  on 
all  the  earth — well  represents  the  Roman 
dominion.  The  symbol  is  such  an  one 
as  we  Avould  now  use  appropriately  to 
represent  that  power,  and  in  every  respect 
that  empire  was  well  represented  by  the 
symbol.  It  may  be  added,  also,  that  this 
supposition  corresponds  with  the  obvious 
interpretation  of  the  p.nrallel  place  in 
chapter  ii.  33,  40,  where  the  same  empire 
is  referred  to  in  the  image  by  the  legs 
and  feet  of  iron.  See  Notes  on  that  pas- 
sage. It  should  be  added,  that  this  fourth 
kingdom  is  to  be  considered  as  prolonged 
through  the  entire  continuance  of  the 
lioman  power,  in  the  various  forms  in 
which  that  power  has  been  kept  up  on  the 
earth — alike  under  the  empire,  and  when 
broken  up  into  separate  sovereignties,  and 
when  again  concentrated  and  embodied 
under  the  Papacy.     IhaX  fourth  poTrer  or 


822 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555. 


doniinioi.  Tras  to  be  continued,  according 
to  the  prediction  here,  until  the  establish- 
ment of  the  kingdom  of  the  saints. — 
Either,  then,  that  kingdom  of  the  saints 
has  come,  or  has  been  set  up,  or  the  fourth 
kingdom,  in  some  form,  still  remains. 
The  truth  is,  that  in  prophecy  the  entire 
Roman  dominion  seems  to  be  contem- 
plated as  o»e — one  mighty  and  formida- 
ble power  trampling  down  the  liberties 
of  the  world  ;  oppressing  and  persecuting 
the  people  of  God — the  true  church  ;  and 
maintaining  an  absolute  and  arbitrary  do- 
minion over  the  souls  of  men — as  a 
mighty  domination  standing  in  the  way 
of  the  progress  of  truth,  and  keeping 
back  the  reign  of  the  saints  on  the  earth. 
In  these  respects  the  Papal  dominion  is, 
and  has  been,  but  a  prolongation,  in  an- 
other form,  of  the  influence  of  heathen 
Rome,  and  the  entire  domination  may 
be  represented  as  one,  and  might  be  S3'm- 
bolized  by  the  fourth  beast  in  the  vision 
of  Daniel.  When  that  power  shall  cease, 
we  may,  according  to  the  prophecj',  look 
for  the  time  when  the  '  kingdom  shall  be 
given  to  the  saints,'  or  when  the  true 
kingdom  of  God  shall  be  set  up  all  over 
the  world. 

(2)  Out  of  this  one  sovereignty,  repre- 
sented bj'  the  fourth  beast,  ten  powers  or 
sovereignties,  represented  bj'  the  ton 
horns,  were  to  arise.  It  was  shown  in  the 
exposition,  that  these  would  all  spring 
out  of  that  one  dominion,  and  would 
v/ield  the  power  that  was  wielded  by  that; 
that  is,  that  the  one  great  power  would 
be  broken  up  and  distributed  into  the 
number  represented  by  ten.  As  the  horns 
all  appeared  at  the  same  time  on  the  beast, 
and  did  not  spring  up  after  one  another, 
so  these  powers  would  be  simultaneous, 
and  would  not  be  a  mere  succession  ;  and 
as  the  horns  all  sprang  from  the  beast,  so 
these  powers  would  all  have  the  same 
origin,  and  be  a  portion  of  the  same  one 
power  now  divided  into  man}'.  The 
question  then  is,  whether  the  Roman 
power  was  in  fact  distributed  into  so  many 
sovereignties  at  any  period  such  as  would 
bo  represented  by  the  springing  up  of  the 
little  horn — if  that  refers  to  the  Papacy. 
Now,  one  has  only  to  look  into  any  his- 
torical work,  to  see  how  in  fact  the  Ro- 
man power  became  distributed  and  broken 
up  in  this  way  into  a  large  number  of 
kingdoms,  or  comparatively  petty  sove- 
reignties, occupying  the  portions  of  the 
world  once  governed  by  Rome.     In  the 


I  decline  of  the  empire,  and  as  the  new 
i  power,  represented  by  the  'little  horn,' 
arose,  there  was  a  complete  breaking  up 
of  the  one  power  that  was  formerly 
wielded,  and  a  large  number  of  statea 
and  kingdoms  sprang  out  of  it.  To  see 
that  there  is  no  difficulty  in  making  out 
the  number  ten,  or  that  some  such  distri- 
bution and  breaking  up  of  the  one  power  is 
naturally  suggested,  I  cast  my  eye  on  the 
historical  chart  of  Lyman,  and  found  tho 
following  kingdoms  or  sovereignties  spe- 
cified as  occupying  the  same  territory 
which  was  possessed  by  the  Roman  em- 
pire, and  springing  from  that,  viz  :  The 
Vandals,  Allans,  Suevi,  Heruli,  Franks, 
Visigoths,  Ostrogoths,  Burgundians,  Lom- 
bards, Britons.  The  Roman  empire  as 
such  had  ceased,  and  the  power  was  dis- 
tributed into  a  large  number  of  compara- 
tively petty  sovereignties — well  repre- 
sented at  this  period  by  the  ten  horns  on 
the  head  of  the  beast.  Even  the  Romanists 
themselves  admit  that  the  Roman  empire 
was,  by  means  of  the  incursions  of  tho 
northern  nations,  dismembered  into  ten 
kingdoms,  (Calmet  on  Rev.  xiii.  1  ;  and 
he  refers  likewise  to  Berangaud,  Bossuet, 
and  DuPin.  See  Newton,  p.  209);  and 
Machiaveli  (Hist,  of  Flor.  1.  i.),  with  no 
design  of  furnishing  an  illustration  of 
this  prophecy,  and  probably  with  no  re- 
collection of  it,  has  mentioned  these 
names: — 1.  The  Ostrogoths  in  Mccsia; 
2.  the  Visigoths  in  Pannonia;  3.  the 
Sueves  and  Alans  in  Gascoigu  and 
Spain  ;  4.  the  Vandals  in  Africa  ;  5.  the 
Franks  in  Fran(  e  ;  C.  the  Burgundians 
in  Burgundy;  7.  the  Ilcruli  and  Turingi, 
in  Italy;  8.  the  Saxons  and  Angles  in 
Britain;  9.  the  Huns  in  Hungary;  10. 
the  Lombards  at  first  upon  the  Danube, 
afterwards  in  Italy.  The  arrangement 
proposed  by  Sir  Isaac  Newton  is  the  fol- 
lowing :  1.  the  kingdom  of  the  Vandals 
and  Alans  in  Spain  and  Africa;  2.  the 
kingdoms  of  the  Suevians  in  Spain ;  3. 
the  kingdom  of  the  Visigoths ;  4.  tho 
kingdom  of  the  Alans  in  Gallia;  5.  the 
kingdom  of  the  Burgundians;  6.  the 
kingdom  of  the  Franks  ;  7.  the  kingdom 
of  the  Britons ;  8.  the  kingdom  of  tho 
Huns;  9.  the  kingdom  of  the  Lombards, 
10.  the  kingdom  of  Ravenna.  Comp.  also 
Duffield  on  the  prophecies,  pp.  279,  280. 
For  other  arrangements  constituting  the 
number  ten,  as  embracing  the  ancient 
power  of  the  Roman  empire.  See  Newton 
on  the  prophecies,  pp.  209,  210.     There 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER    VII. 


323 


is  some  slight  variation  in  the  arrange- 
ment proposed  by  Mr.  Mede,  Bishop 
Lloj-d,  and  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  but  still  it 
is  remarkable  that  it  is  easy  to  make  out 
that  number  with  so  good  a  degree  of  cer- 
tainty, and  particularly  so  that  it  should 
have  been  suggested  by  a  Romanist  him- 
self. Even  if  it  is  not  practicable  to 
make  out  the  number  with  strict  exact- 
ness, or  if  all  writers  do  not  agree  in 
regard  to  the  dynasties  constituting  the 
number  ten,  we  should  bear  in  remem- 
brance the  fact  that  these  powers  arose 
in  the  midst  of  great  confusion;  that 
one  kingdom  arose  and  another  fell  in 
rapid  succession;  and  that  there  was 
not  that  entire  certainty  of  location  and 
boundary  which  there  is  in  old  and  estab- 
lished states.  One  thing  is  certain,  that 
there  never  has  been  a  case  in  which  an 
empire  of  vast  power  has  been  broken  up 
into  small  sovereignties,  to  which  this 
description  would  so  well  apply  as  to  the 
rise  of  the  numerous  dj'nasties  in  the 
breaking  up  of  the  vast  Roman  power; 
and  another  thing  is  equally  certain,  that 
if  we  were  now  to  seek  an  appropriate 
symbol  of  the  mighty  Roman  power — of 
its  conquests,  and  of  the  extent  of  its 
dominion,  and  of  the  condition  of  that 
empire  about  the  time  that  the  Papacy 
arose,  we  could  not  find  a  more  striking 
or  appropriate  symbol  than  that  of  the 
terrible  fourth  beast  with  iron  teeth  and 
brazen  claws — stamping  the  earth  beneath 
his  feet,  and  with  ten  horns  springing  out 
of  his  head. 

(3.)  In  the  midst  of  these  there  sprang 
up  a  little  horn  that  had  remarkable  char- 
acteristics. The  inquiry  now  is,  if  this 
does  not  represent  Antiochus,  whether  it 
finds  a  proper  fulfilment  in  the  Papacy. 
Now,  in  regard  to  this  inquiry,  the  slight- 
est acquaintance  with  the  history  and 
claims  of  the  Papal  power  will  show 
that  there  was  a  striking  appropriateness 
in  the  symbol — such  an  appropriateness, 
that  if  wo  desired  now  to  find  a  symbol 
that  would  represent  this,  we  could  find  no 
one  better  adapted  to  it  than  that  em- 
ployed by  Daniel,  (a)  The  little  horn 
would  spring  up  among  the  others,  and 
stand  among  them — as  dividing  the  power 
with  them,  or  sharing  or  wielding  that 
power.  That  is,  on  the  supposition  that 
it  refers  to  the  Papacy,  the  Papal  power 
would  spring  out  of  the  Roman  empire; 
wouki  be  one  of  the  sovereignties  among 
Which  that  vast  power  wpuld  be  divided, 


and  share  with  the  other  ten  in  wield- 
ing authority.  It  would  be  an  eleventh 
power  added  to  the  ten.  And  who  can 
be  ignorant  that  the  Papal  power  at  the 
beginning,  when  it  first  asserted  civil  au- 
thority, sustained  just  such  a  relation  to 
the  crumbled  and  divided  Roman  empire 
as  this  ?  It  was  just  one  of  the  powers 
into  which  that  vast  sovereignty  passed. 
(6)  It  would  not  spring  up  contemporane- 
ously with  them,  but  would  arise  in  their 
midst,  when  they  already  existed.  They 
are  seen  in  vision  as  actually  existing  to- 
gether, and  this  new  power  starts  up 
among  them.  What  could  be  more  strik- 
ingly descriptive  of  the  Papacy — as  a 
power  arising  when  the  great  Roman 
.authority  was  broken  to  fragments,  and 
distributed  into  a  largo  number  of  sove- 
reignties ?  Then  this  new  power  was  seen 
to  rise — small  at  first,  but  gradually  gain- 
ing strength,  until  it  surpassed  any  one 
of  them  in  strength,  and  assumed  a  posi- 
tion in  the  world  which  no  one  of  them 
had.  The  representation  is  exact.  It  is 
not  a  foreign  power  that  invaded  them  ; 
it  starts  up  in  the  midst  of  them — spring- 
ing out  of  the  head  of  the  same  beast,  and 
constituting  a  part  of  the  same  mighty 
domination  that  ruled  the  world,  (c)  It 
would  be  small  at  first,  but  would  soon 
become  so  powerful  as  to  pluck  up  iind 
displace  three  of  the  others.  And  could 
any  symbol  have  been  better  chosen  to 
describe  the  Papal  power  than  this  ? 
Could  we  find  any  now  that  would  better 
describe  it?  Any  one  needs  to  have  but 
the  slightest  acquaintance  with  the  his- 
tory of  the  Papal  power,  to  know  that  it 
was  small  at  its  beginnings,  and  tliat  its 
ascendencj'  over  Ihe  world  was  the  conse- 
quence of  slow- bat  steady  growth.  In- 
deed, so  feeble  was  it  at  its  commence- 
ment, so  undefined  was  its  first  appear- 
ance and  form,  that  one  of  the  most  diffi- 
cult things  in  history  is  to  know  exactly 
when  it  did  begin,  or  to  determine  the  ex- 
act date  of  its  origin  as  a  distinct  power. 
Different  schemes  in  the  interpretation 
of  prophecy  turn  wholly  on  this.  We 
see,  indeed,  that  power  subsequently 
strongly  marked  in  its  character,  and  ex- 
erting a  mighty  influence  in  the  world — 
having  subjugated  nations  to  its  control ; 
we  see  causes  for  a  long  time  ftt  work 
tending  to  this,  and  can  trace  their  gra- 
dual operation  in  producing  it,  but  the 
exact  period  when  its  dominion  began, 
what  was  the  first  characteristic,  act  of 


324 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555 


the  Papacy  as  such,  what  constituted  its 
precise  beginning  as  a  peculiar  power 
blending  and  combining  a  peculiar  civil 
and  ecclesiastical  authority,  no  one  is 
able  with  absolute  certainty  to  determine. 
Who  can  fix  the  exact  date  ?  Who  can 
tell  precisely  when  it  was  ?  It  is  true 
that  there  were  several  distinct  acts,  or 
the  exercise  of  civil  authority,  in  the 
early  history  of  the  Papacy,  but  what 
was  the  precise  ber/inniii[/  of  that  power, 
no  one  has  been  able  to  determine  with 
so  much  certainty  as  to  leave  no  room  for 
doubt.  Any  one  can  see  with  what  pro- 
priety the  commencement  of  such  a  power 
would  be  designated  by  a  little  horn 
springing  up  among  others,  (d)  It  would 
grow  to  bo  mighty,  for  the  'little  horn' 
thus  grew  to  be  so  powerful  as  to  pluck 
up  three  of  the  horns  of  the  beast.  Of 
the  growth  of  the  power  of  the  Papacj', 
no  one  can  be  ignorant  who  has  any  ac- 
quaintance with  history.  It  held  na- 
tions in  subjection,  and  claimed  and 
exercised  the  right  of  displacing  or  dis- 
tributing crowns  as  it  pleased.  (e)  It 
would  subdue  'three  kings;'  that  is,  three 
of  the  ten  represented  by  the  ten  horns. 
The  prophet  saw  this  at  some  point  in  its 
progress  when  t?iree  fell  before  it,  or  were 
overthrown  by  it.  There  might  have 
been  also  other  points  in  its  history  when 
it  might  have  been  seen  as  having  over- 
thrown more  of  them — perhaps  the  whole 
ten,  but  the  attention  was  arrested  by  the 
fact  that,  soon  after  its  rise,  three  of  the 
ten  were  seen  to  fall  before  it.  Now,  in 
regard  to  the  application  of  this,  it  may 
be  remarked,  (l)that  it  does  «o<  applj-, 
as  already  shown,  to  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes — there  being  no  sense  in  which 
he  overthrew  three  of  the  princes  that 
occupied  the  throne  in  the  succession 
from  Alexander,  tc  say  nothing  of  the 
fact  tiiat  these  were  contemporaneous 
kings  or  kingdoms.  (2)  There  is  no 
other  period  in  history,  and  there  are  no 
other  events  to  which  it  could  be  applied 
except  either  to  Antiochus  or  the  Papacy. 
(Ij)  In  the  confusion  that  existed  ou  the 
breaking  up  of  the  Roman  empire,  and 
the  imperfect  accounts  of  the  transactions 
which  occurred  in  the  rise  of  the  Papal 
power,  it  would  not  be  wonderful  if  it 
should  be  difficult  to  finde\cnts  distinctli/ 
recorded  that  would  bo  in  all  respects  an 
accurate  and  absolute  fulfilment  of  the 
vision.  Yet  (4)  it  is  possible  to  make  out 
Uie  fulfilment  of  this  with  a  good  degree 


of  certainty  in  the  history  of  the  Pa- 
pacy. If  applicable  to  the  Papal  power, 
what  seems  to  be  demanded  is,  that 
three  of  these  ten  kingdoms,  or  sovereign- 
ties, would  be  rooted  up  by  that  power; 
that  they  would  cease  to  exist  as  sepa- 
rate sovereignties ;  that  they  would  be 
added  to  the  sovereignty  that  should 
spring  up;  and  that,  as  distinct  kingdoms, 
they  would  cease  to  play  a  part  in  tha 
history  of  the  world.  The  three  sove- 
reignties thus  transplanted,  or  rooted  up, 
are  supposed  by  Mr.  Mede  to  have  been 
the  Greeks,  the  Longobards,  and  the 
Franks.  Sir  Isaac  Kewton  supposes  they 
were  the  Exarchate  of  Ravenna,  the  Lom- 
bards, and  the  senate  and  dukedom  of 
Rome.  The  objections  which  may  be 
made  to  this  supposition,  may  be  seen  in 
Newton  on  the  Prophecies,  pp.  216,  217. 
The  kingdoms  which  he  supposes  are 
to  be  referred  to,  were  the  following : 
First.  The  Exarchate  of  Ravenna.  This 
of  right  belonged  to  the  Greek  emperors. 
This  was  the  capitol  of  their  dominions 
in  Italy.  It  revolted  at  the  instigation 
of  the  Pope,  and  was  seized  by  Aistul- 
phus,  king  of  the  Lombards,  who  thought 
to  make  himself  master  of  Italj'.  The 
Pope  in  his  exigency  applied  for  aid  to 
Pepin,  king  of  France,  who  marched  into 
Italj',  besieged  the  Lombards  in  Pavia, 
and  forced  them  to  surrender  the  Exar- 
chate and  other  territories  in  Italy. 
These  were  not  restored  to  the  Greek 
emperor,  as  they  in  justice  should  have 
been,  but,  at  the  solicitation  of  the  Pope, 
were  given  to  St.  Peter  and  his  succes- 
sors for  perpetual  possession.  "And 
so,"  says  Platina,  '•  the  name  of  the 
Exarchate,  which  had  continued  from 
the  time  of  Narses  to  the  taking  of  Ra- 
venna, one  hundred  and  seventy  years, 
was  extinguished."  Lives  of  the  Popes. 
This,  according  to  Sigonius,  was  effected 
in  the  year  755.  See  Gibbon,  Dec. 
and  Fall,  IL  224,  III.  332,  334,  338. 
From  this  period,  saj's  Bp.  Newton, 
the  Popes,  being  now  become  temporal 
princes,  no  longer  date  their  epistles 
and  bulls  by  the  year  of  the  emperor's 
reign,  but  by  the  years  of  their  own  ad- 
vancement to  the  Papal  chair.  Second. 
The  kingdom  of  the  Lombards.  This 
kingdom  was  troublesome  to  the  Popes. 
The  dominions  of  the  Pope  were  in- 
vaded by  Desiderius,  in  the  time  of 
Pope  Adrian  I.  Application  was  again 
made  to  the  king  of  France,  and  Charleg 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER    VII. 


3a& 


the  Great,  the  son  nnd  successor  of 
Pepin,  invafled  the  Lombards,  and  de- 
sirous of  enlarging  his  own  dominions, 
jonquered  the  Lombards,  put  an  end  to 
their  kingdom,  and  gave  a  great  part  of 
their  territory  to  the  Pope.  This  was 
the  end  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Lombards, 
in  the  206th  year  after  their  obtaining 
possessions  in  Italy,  and  in  the  year  of 
our  Lord  774.  See  Gibbon,  Dec.  and 
Fall.  IIL  335.  Third.  The  Roman 
States  subjected  to  the  Popes  in  a 
civil  sense.  Though  subject  to  the  Pope 
spiritually,  yet  for  a  long  time  the 
Roman  people  were  governed  bj'  a 
Senate,  and  retained  many  of  their  old 
privileges,  and  elected  both  the  Western 
emperors  and  the  Popes.  This  power, 
however,  as  is  well  known,  passed  into 
the  hands  of  the  Popes,  and  has  been  re- 
tained by  them  to  the  present  time,  the 
Pope  having  continued  to  be  the  civil  as 
well  as  the  ecclesiastical  head.  See  Bp. 
Newton,  pp.  319,  320.  All  semblance  of 
the  freedom  of  ancient  Rome  passed 
away,  and  this  Roman  dominion,  as  such, 
ceased  to  be,  being  completely  absorbed  in 
the  Papacy.  The  Saxons,  the  Franks,  <5:c., 
continued  their  independence  as  civil 
powers;  these  States  passed  entirely  into 
the  dominion  of  the  Pope,  and,  as  in- 
dependent kingdoms  or  sovereignties, 
ceased  to  be.  This  is  the  solution  in  re- 
gard to  the  'three  horns'  that  were  to  be 
plucked  up,  as  given  by  Bp.  Newton. 
Absolute  certainty  in  a  case  of  this  kind 
is  not  to  be  expected  in  the  confusion 
and  indefiniteness  of  that  portion  of  his- 
tor}%  nor  can  it  bo  reasonably  demanded. 
If  there  were  three  of  these  powers  planted 
in  regions  that  became  subject  to  the 
Papal  power,  and  that  disappeared  or 
■were  absorbed  in  that  one  dominion  con- 
stituting the  peculiarity  of  the  Papal 
dominion,  or  which  entered  into  the  Ro- 
man Papal  state,  considered  as  a  sove- 
reignty by  itself  among  the  nations  of  the 
earth,  this  is  all  that  is  required.  Mr. 
Faber  supposes  the  three  to  have  been 
these :  the  Ilerulo-Turingie,  the  Ostro- 
gothic,  and  the  Lombardic,  and  sa3's  of 
them,  that  they  "  were  necpssaril3'  eradi- 
cated in  the  immediate  presence  of  the 
Papacy,  before  which  they  were  geogra- 
phically standing — and  that  the  temporal 
principality  which  bears  the  name  of  St. 
Peter's  patrimony,  was  carved  out  of  the 
mass  t.'  their  subjugated  dominions." 
Sacred  Calendar,  vol."  II.  p.  102.  Prof. 
28 


Gaussen  (Discourse  on  Popery,  Genev.t, 
1S44),  supposes  that  the  three  kings  or 
kingdoms  here  referred  to  were  the  He- 
ruli,  the  Ostrogoths,  and  the  Lombards. 
According  to  Bower  (Lives  of  the  Popes, 
IL  108,  Dr.  Cox's  Edition,  Note),  the 
temporal  dominions  granted  by  Pepin  to 
the  Pope,  or  of  which  the  Pope  became 
possessed  in  consequence  of  the  inter- 
vention of  the  kings  of  France,  were  the 
fullowing :  (1)  The  Exarchate  of  Ra- 
venna, which  comprised,  according  to 
Sigonius,  the  following  cities  :  Ravenna, 
Bologna,  Imola,  Fleuza,  Forlimpoli,  Forli, 
Cesena,  Bobbio,  Ferrara,  Commachio, 
Adria,  Servia,  and  Secchia.  (2)  The 
Pcntapolis,  comprehending  Rimini,  Pe- 
saro.  Concha,  Fano,  Sinigalia,  Ancono, 
Osimo,  Umona,  Jesi,  Fossombrone,  Mon- 
teferetro,  Urbino,  Cagli,  Lucoli,  and  Eu- 
gubio.  (3)  The  city  and  dukedom  of 
Rome,  containing  several  cities  of  note, 
which  had  withdrawn  themselves  from 
all  subjection  to  the  emperor,  had  sub- 
mitted to  St.  Peter  ever  since  the  time 
of  Pope  Gregory  II.  See  also  Bower, 
II.  134,  where  he  says,  "The  Pope  had, 
by  Charlemagne,  been  put  in  possession 
of  the  Exarchate,  the  Pentapolis,  and 
the  dukedom  of  Spoleti,"  [embracing  the 
city  and  dukedom  of  Rome].  And  again, 
on  the  same  page  (Note).  "  The  Popo 
possessed  the  Exarchate,  the  Pentapolis, 
and  the  dukedom  of  Spoleti,  with  the 
city  and  dukedom  of  Rome."  It  should 
be  remembered  that  these  statements  are 
made  by  historians  with  no  reference  to 
any  supposed  fulfilment  of  this  prophecj', 
aid  no  allusion  to  it,  but  as  matters  of 
simple  historical  fact,  occurring  in  the 
regular  course  of  histor}\  The  material 
fact  to  be  made  out  in  order  to  show  that 
this  description  of  the  'little  horn'  is 
applicable  to  the  Papacy  is,  that  at  the 
commencement  of  what  was  properly  the 
Popacij — that  is,  as  I  suppose,  the  wiion 
of  the  spiritual  and  temporal  power,  or 
the  assumption  of  temporal  authority  by 
him  who  was  Bishop  of  Rome,  and  who 
had  been  before  regarded  as  a  mere  spi- 
ritual or  ecclesiastical  ruler,  there  was  a 
triple  jurisdiction  assumed  or  conceded; 
a  three-fold  domination ;  or  a  union  un- 
der himself  of  what  had  been  three  sove- 
reignties, that  now  disappeared  as  inde- 
pendent administrations,  and  whose  dis- 
tinct governments  were  now  merged  in 
the  one  single  sovereignty  of  the  Pope. 
Now,  that  there  was,  just  at  this  time,  or 


326 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555 


nt  the  beginning  of  the  Papacy,  or  ■when 
it  had  so  increased  that  it  could  be  re- 
cognized as  having  a  place  among  the 
temporal  sovereignties  of  the  earth,  such 
a  united  domination,  or  such  a  union  of 
three  separate  powers  under  one,  will  be 
apparent  from  an  extract  from  Mr.  Gib- 
bon. He  is  speaking  of  the  rewards  con- 
ferred on  the  Pope  by  the  Carlovingian 
race  of  kings,  on  account  of  the  favour 
shown  to  them  in  his  conferring  the 
crown  of  France  on  Pepin  the  Mayor  of 
the  palace — directing  in  his  favour  over 
Childeric,  the  descendant  of  Clovis. 
Of  this  transaction,  Mr.  Gibbon  ob- 
serves, in  general  (III.  336),  that  "The 
mutual  obligations  of  the  Popes  and 
the  Carlovingian  family,  form  the  im- 
portant link  of  ancient  and  modern,  of 
civil  and  ecclesiastical  historj'."  He  then 
proceeds,  I.  to  specify  the  gifts  or  favours 
•which  the  Popes  conferred  on  the  Carlo- 
vingian race,  and  II.  those  which,  in  re- 
turn, Pepin  and  Charlemagne  bestowed 
on  tlie  Popes.  In  reference  to  the  latter, 
he  makes  the  following  statement  (III. 
338) :  "  The  gratitude  of  the  Carlovingi- 
ans  was  adequate  to  these  obligations, 
and  their  names  are  consecrated  as  the 
saviours  and  benefactors  of  the  Roman 
Church.  Her  ancient  patrimony  of  farms 
and  houses  was  transformed  by  their 
bounty  into  the  temj^oral  dominion  of  cities 
and  2'>'oi'inc€s,  and  the  donation  of  the 
Exarchate  was  the  first  fruits  of  the  con- 
quests of  Pepin.  Astolphus  [king  of  the 
Lombards]  with  a  sigh  relinquished  his 
prey  ;  the  keys  and  the  hostages  of  the 
principal  cities  were  delivered  to  the 
French  ambassador;  and  in  his  master's 
name  he  presented  them  before  the  tomb 
of  St.  Pt'.er.  The  ample  measure  of 
the  Exarchate  might  comprise  all  the 
provinces  of  Italy  which  had  obeyed 
the  emperor  or  his  vicegerent;  but  its 
strict  and  proper  limits  were  included  in 
the  territories  of  Ravenna,  Bologna,  and 
Ferrara;  its  inseparable  dependency  was 
the  Pentapolis,  which  stretched  along  the 
Adriatic  from  Remini  to  Ancona,  and 
advanced  into  the  midland  country  as  far 
ns  the  ridge  of  the  Apennine.  In  this 
transaction,  the  ambition  and  avarice  of 
the  Popes  had  been  severely  condemned. 
Perhaps  the  humility  of  a  Christian  priest 
should  have  rejected  an  earthly  kingdom, 
which  it  was  not  easy  for  him  to  govern 
without  renouncing  the  virtues  of  his 
profession.     Perhaps  a  faithful  subject,  or 


even  a  generous  enemy,  would  have  been 
less  impatient  to  divide  the  spoils  of  the 
Barbarian  ;  and  if  the  emperor  had  en- 
trusted Stephen  to  solicit  in  his  name  the 
restitution  of  the  Exarchate,  I  will  not 
absolve  the  Pope  from  the  reproach  of 
treachery  and  falsehood.  But,  in  the 
rigid  interpretation  of  the  laws,  every  one 
maj'  accept,  without  inquiry,  whatever 
his  benefactor  may  bestow  without  injus- 
tice. The  Greek  emperor  had  abdicated 
or  forfeited  his  right  to  the  Exarchate; 
and  the  sword  of  Astolphus  was  broken 
by  the  stronger  sword  of  the  Carlovingian. 
It  was  not  in  the  cause  of  the  Iconoclast 
that  Pepin  had  exposed  his  person  and 
army  in  a  double  expedition  beyond  the 
Alps ;  he  possessed  and  he  might  law- 
fully alienate  his  conquests;  and  to  the 
importunities  of  the  Greeks  he  piously  re- 
plied that  no  human  consideration  should 
tempt  him  to  resume  the  gift  which  he 
had  conferred  on  the  Roman  pontiff  for 
the  remission  of  his  sins  and  the  salva- 
tion of  his  soul.  The  splendid  donation 
was  granted  in  supreme  and  absolute  do- 
minion, and  the  u-orld  beheld  for  the  first 
time  a  Christian  bishop  invested  icith  the 
prerogatives  of  a  tempioral  jjrince,  the 
choice  of  magistrates,  the  exercise  of 
justice,  the  imposition  of  taxes,  and  the 
wealth  of  the  palace  of  Ravenna.  In  the 
dissolution  of  the  Lombard  kingdom,  the 
inhabitants  of  the  duchy  of  Spoleti 
sought  a  refuge  from  the  storm,  shaved 
their  heads  after  the  Ravenna  fashion,  de- 
clared themselves  the  servants  and  sub- 
jects of  St.  Peter,  and  completed  hi/  this 
voluntary/  surrender,  the  p)resent  circle  of 
the  Ecclesiastical  State."  The  following 
things  are  apparent  from  this  extract : 
{a)  That  here,  according  to  Mr.  Gibbon, 
was  the  beginning  of  the  temporal  power 
o"f  the  Pope.  (6)  That  this  was  properly, 
in  the  view  above  taken,  the  commence- 
ment of  the  Papacy  as  a  distinct  and  pe- 
culiar dominion,  (c)  That  in  this  there 
was  a  three-fold  government,  or  three 
temporal  sovereignties  united  under  him, 
and  constituting  at  that  time,  in  the  lan- 
guage of  Mr.  Gibbon,  "  the  present  circle 
of  the  ecclesiastical  state."  There  was 
first  the  Exarchate  of  Ravenna ;  second, 
the  Pentapolis,  'which,'  he  says,  was  it» 
'inseparable  dependency;'  and  third,  the 
'  duchy  of  Spoleti,' which,  he  says,  'com- 
pleted the  present  circle  of  the  ecclesias- 
tical State.'  This  was  afterwards,  Mr. 
G-ibbon   goes    on   to   say,   greatly    'en- 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER   VII 


327 


larger!,'  but  this  was  the  form  in  which 
tlio  Papal  power  first  made  its  appear- 
ance among  tho  temporal  sovereignties 
of  Europe.  I  do  not  find,  indeed,  that 
the  kingdom  of  the  Lombards  was,  as  is 
commonly  stated,  among  the  number  of 
the  temporal  sovereignties  that  became 
subject  to  the  authority  of  the  Popes,  but 
I  do  find  that  there  iccre  three  distinct 
temporal  sovereignties  that  lost  their  in- 
dependent existence,  and  that  were  united 
under  that  one  temporal  authority — con- 
stituting by  the  union  of  tho  spiritual 
and  temporal  power  that  one  peculiar 
kingdom.  In  Lombardy  the  power  re- 
mained in  the  possession  of  the  kings  of 
the  Lombards  themselves,  until  that  king- 
dom was  subdued  by  tho  arms  of  Pepin 
and  Charlemagne,  and  then  it  became 
subject  to  the  crown  of  France,  though 
for  a  time  under  the  nominal  reign  of  its 
own  kings.  See  Gibbon,  iii.  334,  335, 
338.  If  it  should  be  said,  that  in  the  in- 
terpretation of  this  passage  respecting  the 
'three  horns'  that  were  plucked  up,  or  tho 
three  kingdoms  that  were  thus  destroyed, 
it  would  be  proper  to  look  for  them  among 
the  ten  into  which  the  one  great  kingdom 
was  divided,  and  that  the  three  above  re- 
ferred to—  the  Exarchate  of  Piavenna,  the 
Pentapolis,  and  the  dukedom  of  Spoleti 
and  Rome,  were  not  properly  of  that  num- 
ber, according  to  the  list  above  given,  it 
is  necessary  in  reply  to  this,  to  advert 
only  to  the  two  main  facts  in  the  case : 
(1)  that  the  great  Roman  power  was  ac- 
tually divided  into  a  large  number  of 
sovereignties  ;  that  sprang  up  on  its  ru- 
ins— usuall3',  but  not  in  fact  exactly,  re- 
presented by  ten  ;  and  (2)  that  the  Papacy 
began  its  career  with  a  conceded  domin- 
ion over  the  three  territories  above  referred 
to — a  part,  in  fact,  of  the  one  great  do- 
minion constituting  the  Roman  power, 
and  are  the  same  territory.  It  is  a  re- 
markable fact,  that  the  Popes  to  this  day  ! 
wear  a  triple  crown — a  fact  that  exists  in 
regard  to  no  other  monarchs — as  if  they 
had  absorbed  under  themselves  three  se- 
parate and  distinct  sovereignties,  or  as  if 
they  represented  three  separate  forms  of  I 
dominion.  Tho  sum  of  what  is  said  in 
the  exposition  of  these  verses  may  be 
thus  expressed : — (1)  That  there  was  ori- 
ginally one  great  sovereignty  represented 
here  by  the  'fourth  beast' — the  Roman 
empire.  (2)  That,  in  fiict,  as  is  abund- 
antly confirmed  by  history,  this  one  great 
and  united  power  was  broken  up  into  a 


large  number  of  separate  and  independent 
sovereignties — most  naturally  and  obvi- 
ously  described  by  ten,  or  such  as  would 
appear  in  a  prophetic  vision  to  be  ten,  and 
such  as  is  actually  so  represented  by  histo- 
rians having  no  interest  in  the  fulfilment  of 
the  prophecj',  and  no  designed  reference  to 
what  may  be  symbolized  by  the '  ten  horns ;' 
(3)  that  there  was  another  peculiar  and  dis- 
tinct power  that  sprang  out  of  them,  and 
that  grew  to  be  mighty — a  power  unlike 
the  others,  and  unlike  any  thing  that  had 
before  appeared  in  the  world — combining 
qualities  to  be  found  in  no  other  sove- 
reignty— having  a  peculiar  relation  at  tho 
same  time  to  tho  one  original  sovereignty, 
and  to  the  ten  into  which  that  was  divided 
— the  prolongation,  in  an  important  sense, 
of  the  power  of  the  one,  and  springing  up 
in  a  peculiar  manner  among  the  others — 
that  peculiar  ecclesiastical  and  civil  power 
— the  Papac}' — well  represented  by  the 
'little  horn;'  (4)  that  in  fact  this  one  power 
absorbed  into  itself  three  of  these  sove- 
reignties— annihilating  them  as  independ- 
ent powers,  and  combining  them  into  one 
most  peculiar  dominion — properly  repre- 
sented by  'plucking  them  up;'  (5)  that 
as  a  proper  symbol,  or  emblem  of  some 
such  domination,  a  crown  or  diadem  is 
still  worn,  most  naturally  and  obviously 
snggestinfj  such  a  three-fold  absorption  of 
dominion ;  (6)  that  all  this  is  actually 
prefigured  by  the  symbols  employed  by 
the  prophet,  or  that  the  symbols  are  such 
as  would  be  naturally  employed  on  tho 
supposition  that  these  events  were  de- 
signed to  be  referred  to;  and  (7)  that 
there  have  been  no  other  historical  events 
to  which  these  remarkable  symbols  could 
bo  naturally  and  obviously  applied.  And 
if  these  things  are  so,  how  are  they  to  be 
explained  except  on  the  supposition  that 
Daniel  was  inspired  ?  Has  man  any  nat- 
ural sagacity  by  which  such  symbols  rep- 
resenting the  future  could  be  suggested? 
(/)  It  would  bo  arrogant  and  proud, 
'  speaking  great  words  against  the  Most 
High.'  No  Protestant  will  doubt  that 
this  is  true  of  the  Papacy;  no  one  ac- 
quainted with  history  will  presume  to 
call  it  in  question.  The  arrogant  preten- 
sions of  the  Papacy  have  been  manifested 
in  all  the  history  of  that  power,  and  no 
one  can  doubt  that  its  assumptions  have 
been,  in  fact,  by  fair  construction,  'a 
speaking  of  great  words  against  God.' 
The  Pope  has  claimed,  or  allowed  to  be 
conferred  on  him,  names  and  preroga- 


328 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555 


tives  -which  can  bel.^ng  ouly  to  God.  See 
this  fully  shown  in  the  Notes  on  2  Thess. 
ii.  4.  The  facts  there  referred  to  .ore  all 
thixtis  necessiiry  to  illustrate  this  passage, 
on  the  supposition  that  it  refers  to  the 
Papacy.  Comp.  also  the  '  Literalist/  vol. 
•  pp.  24 — 27.  ((/)  This  would  bo  a  perse- 
cuting power — •  making  war  with  the 
saints,'  and  '  wearing  out  the  saints  of 
the  Most  High.'  Can  any  one  doubt  that 
this  is  true  of  the  Papacy  ?  The  Inqui- 
sition; the  'persecutions  of  the  Walden- 
ses ;'  the  ravages  of  the  Duke  of  Alva; 
the  fires  of  Smithfield;  the  tortures  at 
Goa — indeed,  the  whole  history  of  the 
Papacy  may  be  appealed  to  in  proof  that 
this  is  applicable  to  that  power.  If  any 
thing  could  have  'worn  out  the  saints  of 
the  Most  High' — could  have  cut  them  off 
from  the  earth  so  that  evangelical  religion 
would  have  become  extinct,  it  would 
have  been  the  persecutions  of  the  Papal 
power.  In  the  j-ear  120S,  a  crusade  was 
proclaimed  by  Pope  Innocent  III.  against 
the  Waldenses  and  Albigenses,  in  which 
a  million  of  men  perished.  From  the  be- 
ginning of  the  order  of  the  Jesuits,  in 
the  year  1540  to  1580,  nine  hundred 
thousand  were  destroj'cd.  One  hundred 
and  fifty  thousand  perished  by  the  Inqui- 
sition in  thirty  years.  In  the  Low  coun- 
tries fifty  thousand  persons  were  hanged, 
beheaded,  burned,  and  buried  alive,  for 
the  crime  of  heresy,  within  the  space  of 
thirty-eight  years  from  the  edict  of 
Charles  V.,  against  the  Protestants,  to 
the  peace  of  Chateu  Cambreses  in  1559. 
Eighteen  thousand  suffered  by  the  hand 
of  the  executioner,  in  the  space  of  five 
years  and  a  half,  during  the  administra- 
tion of  the  Duke  of  Alva.  Indeed,  the 
slightest  acquaintance  with  the  historj' 
of  the  Papacy,  will  convince  any  one  that 
what  is  hero  said  of  'making  war  with 
the  saints'  (ver.  21),  and  'wearing  out 
the  saints  of  the  Most  High'  (ver.  25),  is 
strictly  applicable  to  that  power,  and  will 
accurately  describe  its  history.  There 
have  been,  indeed,  other  persecuting 
powers,  but  none  to  which  this  language 
would  be  so  .applicable,  and  none  which 
it  would  so  naturally  suggest.  In  proof 
of  this,  it  is  only  necessary  to  refer  to  the 
history  of  the  Papacj-,  and  to  what  it  has 
done  to  extirpate  those  who  have  pro- 
fessed a  different  faith.  Let  any  one  re- 
call (a)  the  persecution  of  the  Waldenses  ; 
[I))  the  acts  of  the  Duke  of  Alva  in  the 
Low   countries;    (c)  the   persecution   in 


England  under  Mary;  {d)  the  Inquisi- 
tion ;  (c)  the  attempts,  too  successful,  to 
extinguish  all  the  efforts  at  Reformation 
in  Italy  and  Spain  in  the  time  of  Luther 
and  Calvin  (see  McKrie),  and  (/)  the  at- 
tempts to  put  down  the  Reformation  in 
Germ.any  and  Switzerland,  all  which  were 
either  directly  originated  or  sanctioned 
by  the  Papacy,  and  all  for  the  same  end, 
and  he  will  see  no  reason  to  doubt  that 
the  language  here  is  strictly  applicable  to 
that  power,  and  that  there  has  been  no 
government  on  earth  which  would  be  so 
naturally  suggested  by  it.  Cunninghame, 
in  the  Literalist,  i.  27,  28.  Indeed,  who 
can  number  up  all  that  have  perished  in 
the  Inquisition  alone?  {h)  It  would 
claim  legislative  power — 'thinking  to 
change  times  and  laws.'  The  original 
Chaldee  here  may  bo  rendered,  as  is  done 
by  Gescnius  and  De  Wette,  set  times, 
stated  times,  OT  festival  seasons.  The  word 
here,  says  Gescnius  {Lex.),  is  'spoken  of 
sacred  seasons,  festivals,'  and  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that  in  this  place  it  refers  to 
religious  institutions.  The  meaning  is, 
that  he  would  claim  control  over  such  in- 
stitutions or  festivals,  and  that  he  would 
appoint  or  change  them  at  his  pleasure. 
He  would  abolish  or  modify  existing  in- 
stitutions of  that  kind,  or  he  would  insti- 
tute new  ones,  as  should  seem  good  to 
him.  This  would  be  applicable,  then,  to 
some  power  that  should  claim  .authority 
to  prescribe  religious  institutions,  and  to 
change  the  laws  of  God.  No  one,  also, 
can  fail  to  see  a  fulfilment  of  this  in  the 
claims  of  the  Papac}',  in  setting  up  a  ju- 
risdiction over  seasons  of  festival  and 
fast;  and  in  demanding  that  the  laws  of 
kingdoms  should  be  so  moulded  as  to 
sustain  its  claims,  and  modifying  the  laws 
of  God  as  revealed  in  the  Bible.  The 
right  of  deposing  and  setting  up  kings ; 
of  fi.xing  the  boundaries  of  rations  ;  of 
giving  away  crowns  and  sceptres  ;  and 
of  exercising  dominion  over  the  sacred 
seasons,  the  customs,  the  amusements  of 
nations — all  these,  as  illustrated  under 
the  Papacy,  will  leave  no  doubt  that  all 
this  would  find  an  ample  fulfilment  in  the 
history  of  that  power.  The  Pope  has 
claimed  to  be  the  head  of  the  church,  and 
has  asserted  and  exercised  the  right  of 
appointing  sacred  seasons;  of  abolishing 
ancient  institutions  ;  of  introducing  num- 
berless new  festival  occasions,  practically 
abrogating  the  laws  of  God  on  a  great  va- 
riety of  subjects.     We  need  only  refer,  io 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER   VII. 


329 


illustration  of  thio,  (a)  to  the  claim  of  in- 
faliibilitj-,  by  which  an  absolute  jurisdic- 
tion is  asserted  that  covers  the  whole 
ground  ;  (b)  to  all  the  laws  pertaining  to 
image-worship,  so  directly  in  the  face  of 
the  laws  of  God;  (c)  to  the  celibacy  of 
the  clcrgj',  rendering  void  one  of  the  laws 
of  heaven  in  relation  to  marriage;  (d)  to 
the  whole  doctrine  respecting  purgatory; 
(e)  to  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation ; 
(/ )  to  the  practical  abolition  of  the  chris- 
tian sabbath  by  appointing  numerous 
saints'  days  to  be  observed  as  equally 
sacred ;  (i/)  to  the  law  withholding  the 
cup  from  the  laity — contrary  to  the  com- 
mandment of  the  Saviour,  and  (//)  in 
general  to  the  absolute  control  claimed 
by  the  Papacy,  over  the  whole  subject  of 
religion.  Indeed,  nothing  would  better 
characterize  this  power  than  to  say  that 
it  as.serted  the  right  to  'change  times  and 
laws.'  And  to  all  this  should  be  added 
another  characteristic  (ver.  S),  that  'it 
would  have  the  eyes  of  a  man ;'  that  is, 
would  be  distinguished  for  a  far-seeing 
sagacity.  Could  this  be  so  appropriately 
applied  to  anything  else  as  to  the  deep, 
the  artful,  and  the  far-reaching  diplomacy 
of  the  court  of  Rome ;  to  the  sagacity  of 
the  Jesuit;  to  the  skilful  policy  which 
subdued  the  world  to  itself? 

These  illustrations  will  leave  no  doubt, 
it  seems  to  me,  that  all  that  is  here  said 
will  find  an  ample  fulfilment  in  the  Pa- 
pacy, and  that  it  is  to  be  regarded  as 
having  a  reference  to  that  power.  If  so, 
it  only  remains 

III.  To  inquire  what,  according  to  this 
interpretation,  we  are  to  expect  will  yet 
occur,  or  what  light  this  passage  throws 
on  events  that  are  yet  future.  The 
origin,  the  growth,  the  general  charac- 
ter and  influence  of  this  poi'er  up  to  a 
distant  period,  are  illustrated  by  this  in- 
terpretation. What  remains  is  the  in- 
quiry, from  the  passage  before  us,  how 
Jong  this  is  to  continue,  and  what  we  are  1 
to  anticipate  in  regard  to  its  fall.  The 
following  points,  then,  would  seem  to  be 
clear,  on  the  supposition  that  this  refers 
to  the  Papal  power. 

It  is  to  continue  a  definite  period  from 
its  establishment,  ver  25.  This  duration 
is  mentioned  as  'a  time,  and  times,  and 
the  dividing  of  a  time  :' — three  years  and 
a  half — twelve  hundred  and  sixty  days — 
twelve  hundred  and  sixty  years.  See 
the  Notes  on  that  verse.  The  only  diffi- 
culty in  regard  to  this,  if  that  interpreta- 
28  » 


tion  is  correct,  is  to  determine  the  time 
when  the  Papacy  actually  began — tlie 
terminus  a  quo — and  this  has  given  rise 
to  all  the  diversity  of  explanation  among 
Protestants.  Assuming  any  one  time  as 
the  period  when  the  Papal  power  arose, 
as  a  date  from  which  to  calculate,  it  is 
easy  to  compute  from  that  date,  and  to 
fix  some  period — terminics  ad  quern — to 
which  this  refers,  and  which  may  be 
looked  to  as  the  time  of  the  overthrow  of 
that  power.  But  there  is  nothing  more 
difficult  in  history  than  the  determination 
of  the  exact  time  when  the  Papaci/  pro- 
perly began  : — that  is,  when  the  peculiar 
domination  which  is  fairly  understood  by 
that  system,  commenced  in  the  world ; 
or  what  were  its  first  distinguishing  acts. 
History  has  not  so  marked  that  period  that 
there  is  no  room  for  doubt.  It  has  not 
affixed  definite  dates  to  it ;  and  to  this  day 
it  is  not  easy  to  make  out  the  time  when 
that  power  commenced,  or  to  designate  any 
one  event  at  a  certain  period  that  will 
surely  mark  it.  It  seems  to  have  been  a 
gradual  growth,  and  its  commencement 
has  not  been  so  definitely  characterized 
as  to  enable  us  to  demonstrate  with 
absolute  certainty  the  time  to  which 
the  twelve  hundred  and  sixty  years  will 
extend. 

Different  writers  have  assigned  diflfer- 
cnt  periods  for  the  rise  of  the  Papacy, 
and  different  acts  as  the  first  act  of  that 
power ;  .and  all  the  prophecies  as  to  its 
termination  depend  on  the  period  which 
is  fixed  on  as  the  time  of  its  rise.  It  is 
this  which  has  led  to  so  much  that  is 
conjectural,  and  which  has  been  the  oc- 
casion of  so  much  disappointment,  and 
which  throws  so  much  obscurity  now 
over  all  calculations  as  to  the  termi- 
nation of  that  power.  In  nothing  is 
the  Scripture  more  clear  than  that  that 
power  shall  be  destroyed  ;  and  if  we  could 
ascertain  with  exactness  the  date  of  its 
origin,  there  would  be  little  danger  of 
erring  in  regard  to  its  close.  The  dif- 
ferent periods  which  have  been  fixed  on 
as  the  date  of  its  rise,  have  been  princi- 
pally the  following:  (1)  An  edict  pub- 
lished by  Justinian  (A.  D.  533),  and  a 
letter  addressed  by  him  at  the  same  time 
to  the  Pope,  in  which  he  acknowledged 
him  to  be  the  head  of  the  churches,  thus 
conferring  on  him  a  title  belonging  only 
to  the  Saviour,  and  putting  himself  and 
empire  under  the  dominion  of  the  Bishop 
of  Kome.    Duffield  on  the  Prophecies, 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555. 


p.  281.  (2)  The  decree  of  ,he  emperor 
Phocas  (A.  D.  606),  confirmi  jg  what  had 
been  done  by  Justinian,  and  giving  his 
sanction  to  the  code  of  laws  promulgated 
by  him  :  a  code  of  laws  based  on  the 
acknowledged  supremacy  of  the  Pope, 
and  which  became  the  basis  of  European 
legislation  for  centuries ;  and  conferring 
on  him   the  title  of  '  Universal  Bishop.' 

(3)  The  act  of  Pope  Stephen,  by  which, 
when  appealed  to  by  the  claimant  to  the 
crown  of  France,  he  confirmed  Pepin  in 
the  kingdom,  and  set  aside  Childeric  III., 
and,  in  return,  received  from  Pepin  the 
Exarchate  of  Ravenna  and  the  Penta- 
polis.  See  Eanke's  Hist,  of  the  Papacy, 
vol.  I.  23.     This  occurred  about  A.  D.  752. 

(4)  The  opinion  of  Mr.  Gibbon  (IV.  363,) 
that  Gregory  the  Seventh  was  the  true 
founder  of  the  Papal  power.  "  Gregory 
the  Seventh,"  says  be,  "  who  may  be 
adored  or  detested  as  the  founder  of  the 
Papal  monarchy,  was  driven  from  Rome, 
and  died  in  exile  at  Salerno."  Gregory 
became  Pope  A.  D.  1073.  These  difl'erent 
dates,  if  assumed  as  the  foundation  of  the 
Papal  power,  would,  by  the  addition  to 
each  of  the  period  of  1260  years,  lead  re- 
spectively to  the  year  1793,  1866,  2105, 
and  2333,  as  the  period  of  the  termination 
of  the  Papal  dominion.  As  this  is  a 
point  of  great  importance  in  the  expla- 
nation of  the  prophecies,  it  may  be  pro- 
per to  examine  these  opinions  a  little 
more  in  detail.  But  in  order  to  this,  it  is 
necessarj'  to  have  a  clear  conception  of 
what  the  Papaeij  as  a  distinct  domina- 
tion is,  or  what  constitutes  its  peculiarit}', 
as  seen  by  the  sacred  writers,  and  as  it 
has  in  fact  existed,  and  does  exist  in  the 
world;  and  in  regnrd  to  this  there  can 
be  little  difference  of  opinion.  It  is  not 
a  mere  ecclesiastical  power — not  a  mere 
spiritual  domination — not  the  control  of 
a  bishop  as  such  over  a  church  or  a  dio- 
cese— nor  is  it  a  mere  temporal  dominion, 
but  it  is  manifestly  the  union  of  the  two  : 
that  peculiar  domination  which  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  has  claimed,  as  growing  out  of 
his  primacy  as  the  head  of  the  church, 
and  of  a  temporal  power  also,  asserted  at 
first  over  a  limited  jurisdiction,  but  ulti- 
mately, and  as  a  natur.Tl  consequence, 
•^ver  all  other  sovereignties,  and  claiui- 
itig  universal  dominion.  We  shall  not 
find  the  Papacy,  or  the  Papal  dominion 
as  sucir,  clearly,  in  the  mere  spiritual  rule 
of  the  first  Bishop  of  Rome,  nor  in  that  j 
Hero    epiritual    dominion,    however  en- 1 


larged,  but  m  that  junction  of  the  two, 
when,  in  virtue  of  a  pretended  divine 
right,  a  temporal  dominion  grew  up,  that 
ultimately  extended  itself  over  Europe, 
claiming  the  authority  to  dispose  of 
crowns  ;  to  lay  kingdoms  under  interdict, 
and  to  absolve  subjects  from  their  alle- 
giance. If  we  can  find  the  beginjing  of 
this  claim — the  germ  of  this  peculiar  kind 
of  domination — we  shall  doubtless  have 
found  the  commencement  of  the  Papacy — 
the  terminus  a  quo — as  it  was  seen  by  the 
prophets — the  point  from  which  we  are 
to  reckon  in  determining  the  question  of 
its  duration. 

With  this  view,  then,  of  the  nature  of 
the  Papacj',  it  is  proper  to  inquire  when 
it  commenced,  or  which  of  the  periods 
referred  to,  if  either,  can  be  properly  re- 
garded as  the  commencement. 

(I)  The  Edict  of  Justinian,  and  the 
,  letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  in  which 
:  he  acknowledged  him  to  be  the  head  of 
I  the  church,  A.  D.  533.  This  occurred 
under  John  II.,  reckoned  as  the  fifty- 
fifth  Bishop  of  Rome.  The  nature  of  this 
application  of  Justinian  to  the  Pope,  and 
the  honour  conferred  on  him,  was  this  : 
On  an  occasion  of  a  controversy  in  the 
,  church,  on  the  question  whether  "  one 
!  person  of  the  Trinity  suffered  in  the 
I  flesh,"  the  monks  of  Constantinople,  fear- 
ful of  being  condemned  under  an  edict 
j  of  Justinian  for  heresy  in  denying  this, 
j  applied  to  the  Pope  to  decide  the  point. 
Justinian,  who  took  great  delight  in  in- 
quiries of  that  nature,  and  who  main- 
tained the  opposite  opinion  on  that  sub- 
ject, also  made  his  appeal  to  the  Pope. 
Having,  therefore,  drawn  up  a  long  creed, 
containing  the  disputed  article  among 
the  rest,  ho  despatched  two  bishops  with 
it  to  Rome,  and  laid  the  whole  matter 
before  the  Pope.  At  the  same  time  he 
wrote  a  letter  to  the  Pope,  congratulating 
him  on  his  election,  assuring  him  that 
the  faith  contained  in  the  confession 
which  he  sent  him  was  the  faith  of  the 
whole  eastern  church,  and  entreating 
him  to  declare  in  his  answer  that  ho  re- 
ceived to  his  communion  all  who  pro- 
fessed that  faith,  and  none  who  did  not. 
To  add  weight  to  the  letter,  he  accom. 
panied  it  with  a  present  to  St.  Peter, 
consisting  of  several  chalices,  and  other 
vessels  of  gold,  enriched  with  precious 
stones.  From  this  deference  to  the  Pope, 
on  the  part  of  the  emperor,  and  this  sub- 
mitting to  him,  as  the  head  of  the  whole 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER    VII. 


531 


church,  of  an  important  question  to  be 
determined,  it  has  been  argued  that  this 
was  properly  the  beginning  of  the  Pa- 
pacy, and  that  the  twelve  hundred  and 
sixty  years  are  to  be  reckoned  from  that. 
But  against  this  opinion  the  objections 
are  insuperable  :  for  (a)  there  was  here 
nothing  of  that  ^Y\uch 23roperli/  constitutes 
the  Pajiaey — the  peculiar  union  of  the 
temporal  and  spiritual  power ;  or  the 
peculiar  domination  which  that  power 
has  exerted  over  the  world.  All  that 
occurred  was  the  mere  deference  which 
an  emperor  showed  to  one  who  claimed 
to  be  the  spiritual  head  of  the  church, 
and  who  had  long  before  claimed  that. 
There  was  no  chanfjc — no  beginning,  pro- 
perly so  called — no  commencement  of  a 
new  form  of  domination  over  mankind, 
such  as  the  Papacy  has  been.  (6)  But, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  there  was,  after  all, 
little  real  deference  to  the  Pope  in  this 
case.  "  Little  or  no  account,"  says  Bower, 
"ought  to  be  made  of  that  extraordinary 
deference  [the  deference  shown  by  car- 
rying this  question  before  the  Pope]. 
Justinian  paid  great  deference  to  the 
Pope,  as  well  as  to  all  other  bishops,  when 
they  agreed  with  him;  but  none  at  all 
when  they  did  not ;  thinking  himself,  at 
least,  as  well  qualified  as  the  best  of  them, 
and  so  ho  certainly  was,  to  decide  con- 
troversies concerning  the  faith  ;  and  we 
shall  soon  see  him  entering  the  lists  with 
his  holiness  himself."  Lives  of  the 
Popes,  L  336. 

IL  The  second  date  which  has  been 
assigned  to  the  origin  of  the  Papacy,  is  the 
decree  made  by  the  emperor  Phocas  (A.  D. 
606),  by  which,  it  is  said,  he  confirmed 
the  grant  made  by  Justinian.  This  act 
was  the  following:  Boniface  III.,  when 
he  had  been  made  bishop  of  Rome,  rely- 
ing on  the  favour  and  partiality  which 
Phocas  had  shown  him,  prevailed  on  him 
to  revoke  the  decree  settling  the  title  of 
'  Universal  Bishop'  on  the  bishop  of  Con- 
stantinople, and  obtained  another  settling 
that  title  on  himself  and  his  successors. 
The  decree  of  Phocas,  conferring  this 
title,  has  not  indeed  come  down  to  us ; 
but  it  has  been  the  common  testimony  of 
historians  thaD  such  title  was  conferred. 
See  Mosheim  L  513,  Bower  L  420.  The 
fact  asserted  here  has  been  doubted,  and 
Mosheim  supposes  that  it  rests  on  the 
authority  of  Baronius.  "  Still,"  says  he, 
*'it  is  certain  that  something  of  this  kind 
occurred."    But  there  are  serious  objec- 


tions to  our  regarding  this  as  properly 
the  commencement  of  the  Papacy  as  such. 
For  [a)  this  was  not  the  beginning  of  that 
peculiar  domination,  or  form  of  power, 
which  the  Pope  has  asserted  and  main- 
tained. If  this  title  were  conferred,  it  im- 
parted no  new  power;  it  did  not  change 
the  nature  of  this  domination ;  it  did  not,  in 
fact,  make  the  Roman  bishop  difi"erent  from 
what  he  was  before.  He  was  still,  in  all 
respects,  subject  to  the  civil  power  of  the 
emperors,  and  had  no  control  beyond  that 
which  he  exercised  in  the  church.  (6)  And 
even  (/n's  little  was  withdrawn  by  the 
same  authority  which  granted  it — the  au- 
thority of  the  emperor  of  Constantinople 
— though  it  has  always  since  been  claimed 
and  asserted  by  the  Pope  himself.  See 
Bower,  I.  427.  It  is  true  that,  as  a  con- 
sequence of  the  fact  that  this  title  was 
conferred  on  the  Popes,  they  began  to 
grasp  at  power,  and  aspire  to  temporal 
dominion  ;  but  still  there  was  no  formal 
grasp  of  such  power  growing  out  of  the 
'  assumption  of  this  title,  nor  was  any  such 
temporal  dominion  set  up  as  the  immedi- 
ate result  of  such  a  title.  The  act,  there- 
fore, was  not  sufficiently  marked,  distinct, 
and  decisive,  to  constitute  an  epoch,  in 
the  beginning  of  an  era,  in  the  history  of 
the  world,  and  the  rise  of  the  Papacy  can- 
not with  any  propriety  be  dated  from  thai. 
This  was  undoubtedly  one  of  the  steps  by 
which  that  peculiar  power  rose  to  its 
greatness,  or  which  contributed  to  lay  the 
foundation  of  its  subsequent  claims,  its 
arrogance,  and  its  pride ;  but  it  is  doubt- 
ful whether  it  was  so  important  an  event 
characterizing  the  Papacy  as  to  be  re- 
garded as  the  origin,  or  the  terminus  a  quo 
in  ascertaining  the  time  of  its  continu- 
ance.*    It  was,  however,  in  view  of  this, 

*Mr.  Ilallam  (Middle  Ages,  1,  420,  Note) 
urges  the  following  arguments  substantially, 
against  the  supposition  that  the  Papal  suprem- 
acy ha.l  its  rise  from  this  epoch,  and  is  to  be 
dated  from  the  concession  of  the  title  of  Uni- 

I  versal  liishop  made  by  Phocas  to  Boniface  III. 

I  viz:     (1)  Its    truth  as  commonly  stated,  ap- 

'  pears  more  than  questionable.  (2)  "  But  if  the 
strongest  proof  could  be  advanced  for  the  au- 

I  thenticity  of  this  circumstance,  we  may  well 
deny  its  importance.  Tlie  concession  of  Phocas 
could  have  been  of  no  validity  in  Lombardy, 
France,  and  other  western  countries,  where 
nevertheless,  the  Papal  supremacy  was  incom- 
parably more  established   than  in  the  east." 

j  (Ij)  "  Even  within  the  empire  it  could  have  had 

I  no  efficacy  after  the  violent  death  of  that  usurp- 
er, which  occurred  socn  afterwards."  (4;  '•  The 
title  of  Universal  Bishop  is  not  very  intelligible, 

i  but  whatever  it  means  the  patriarchs  of  Con- 


332 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  555 


and  with  this  considered  as  properly  the 
origin  of  the  Papacy,  that  the  Rev.  Rob- 
ert rieininjr.  in  his  work  on  the  '  Rise  and 
Fallot' the  Papacy,' first  published  in  170], 
uttered  the  following  remarkable  lan- 
guage, as  based  on  his  calculations  re- 
specting the  continuance  of  that  power  : 
"  If  we  may  suppose  that  Antichrist  be- 
gan his  reign  in  the  year  606,  the  addi- 
tional one  thousand  two  hundred  and 
sixty  years  of  his  duration,  were  they 
Julian  or  ordinary  years,  would  lead  down 
to  the  year  1S66,  ns  the  last  period  of  the 
seven-headed  monster.  But  seeing  they 
are  prophetical  years  only  [of  360  days], 
■wc  must  cast  away  eighteen  years  in  or- 
der to  bring  them  to  the  exact  measure 
of  time  that  the  Spirit  of  God  designs  in 
this  book.  And  tints  the  final  period  of 
the  Papal  iistirpadons  (snpposinr/  that  he 
did  indeed  rise  in  the  year  606)  must  eon- 
chtde  with  the  year  18-48."  P.  25.  Ed. 
New  York.  Whether  this  be  considered 
as  merely  a  ha2>py  eonjcctiire — the  one 
successful  one  among  thousands  that  have 
failed,  or  as  the  result  of  a  proper  calcu- 
lation respecting  the  future,  no  one  in 
comparing  it  with  the  events  of  the  year 
1848,  when  the  Pope  was  driven  from 
Rome,  and  when  a  popular  government 
was  established  in  the  very  seal  of  the 
Papal  power,  can  fail  to  see  that  it  is  re- 
markable considered  as  having  been  ut- 
tered a  century  and  a  half  ago.  AVhether 
it  is  the  correct  calculation,  and  that  tem- 
porary downfall  of  the  Papal  Government 
is  to  be  regarded  as  the  first  in  a  series 
of  events  that  will  ultimately  end  in  its 
destruction,  time  must  determine.  The 
reasons  mentioned  above,  however,  and 
those  which  will  be  suggested  in  favour 
of  a  different  beginning  of  that  power, 
make  it,  at  present,  more  probable  that  a 
different  period  is  to  be  assigned  as  its 
close. 

III.  The  third    date  which   has  been 
assigned  as  the  beginning  of  the  Papacy, 

Btantinople  had  borne  it  before,  and  continued  to 
bear  it  afterwards."  (o)  "  The  preccdinf;  Popes, 
Pelagius  IX.  and  Gregory  I.,  had  constantly  dis- 
claimed the  appellation  ;  nor  does  it  appear  to 
have  been  claimed  by  the  fuccessors  of  Uoniface, 
nt  least  for  some  centuries."  (6.)  '■  The  Popes  had 
undoubtedly  exercised  a  species  of  supremacy 
for  more  than  two  centuries  before  this  time, 
xvnioh  had  lately  roachod  a  hiijh  point  of  au- 
thority under  Gregory  I."  (7.)  "There  are 
no  .sensible  marks  of  this  supremacy  making 
a  more  rapid  progress  for  a  century  and  a  half 
ilter  the  pretended  grant  of  this  emperor." 


is  the  grant  of  Pepin  above  reforrsd  to, 
A.  D.  752.  This  grant  conferred  by  Pe- 
pin was  confirmed  also  by  Charlemagne 
and  his  successors,  and  it  was  undoubt- 
edly at  this  period  that  the  Papacy  began 
to  assume  its  place  among  the  sovereign- 
ties of  Europe.  In  favour  of  this  opin- 
ion— that  this  was  properly  the  rise  of 
the  papacy — the  tenniniis  a  quo  of  ptc- 
phecy,  the  folio  wing  considerations  may  be 
urged  :  («)  We  have  here  a  definite  act — 
an  act  which  is  palpable  and  apparent,  as 
characterizing  the  progress  of  this  domi- 
nation over  men.  (h)  We  have  here  pro- 
perly the  heijinninrj  of  tho  temporal  do- 
minion, or  tho  first  acknowledged  exercise 
of  that  power  in  acts  of  temporal  sove- 
reignty— in  giving  laws,  asserting  doinin- 
ion,  swaying  a  temporal  sceptre,  and 
wearing  a  temporal  crown.  All  the  acts  be- 
fore had  been  of  a  spiritual  character,  and 
all  the  deference  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
had  been  of  a  spiritual  nature.  Hence- 
forward, however,  he  was  acknowledged 
as  a  temporal  prince,  and  took  his  place 
as  such  among  the  crowned  heads  of  Eu- 
rope, (c)  This  is  properly  the  beginning 
of  that  mighty  domination  which  the 
Pope  wielded  over  Europe — a  beginning, 
which,  however  small  at  first,  ultimately 
became  so  powerful  and  so  arrogant  as  to 
claim  jurisdiction  over  all  the  kingdoms 
of  the  earth,  and  the  right  to  absolve  sub- 
jects from  their  allegiance,  to  laj'  king- 
doms under  interdict,  to  dispose  of  crowns, 
to  order  the  succession  of  princes,  to  tax  all 
people,  and  to  dispose  of  all  newly  discov- 
ered countries.  ((/)  This  accords  better 
with  the  prophecies  than  any  other  one 
event  which  has  occurred  in  the  world — es- 
pecially with  the  prophecy  of  Daniel  of  the 
springing  up  of  the  little  horn,  and  tho 
fact  that  that  little  horn  plucked  up  three 
others  of  the  ten  into  which  the  fourth 
kingdom  was  divided.  And  (e)  it  should 
be  added  that  this  agrees  with  the  idea 
all  along  held  up  in  the  prophecies,  that 
this  wotild  be  properly  the  fourth  enquire 
])rolonijcd.  The  fifth  empire  or  kingdom 
is  to  be  tho  reign  of  the  saints,  or  the 
reign  of  righteousness  on  the  earth ,:  the 
fourth  extends  down  in  its  influences  and 
power  to  that.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  thi? 
Pioman  power  was  thus  concentrated  in 
the  Papacy.  The  form  was  changed,  but 
it  was  the  Roman  power  that  was  in  the 
eye  of  the  prophets,  and  this  was  contem- 
plated under  its  various  phat'-s,  as  hea- 
then and  nominally  Christian   unUJ  tho 


B.  C.  555.] 


CHAPTER   VII. 


333 


reign  of  the  saints  should  commence,  or 
the  kingdom  of  God  should  be  set  up. 
But  it  w;is  only  in  the  time  of  Steplien, 
and  by  the  net  of  Pepin  and  Charlemagne, 
that  this  change  occurred,  or  that  this 
dominion  of  a  temporal  character  was  set- 
tled in  the  Papacy — and  that  the  Pope 
was  acknowledged  as  having  this  temporal 
power.  This  was  consummated  indeed  in 
Hildebrand,  or  Gregory  YII.  (Gibbon  iii. 
353,  iv.  363),  but  t/iis  mighty  power 
properly  had  its  oriijin  in  the  time  of 
Pepin. 

IV.  The  fourth  date  assigned  for  the 
origin  of  the  Papacy  is  the  time  of  Hil- 
debrand, or  Gregory  VII.  This  is  the 
period  assigned  by  Mr.  Gibbon.  Respect- 
ing this,  he  remarks  (vol.  iv.  p.  363), 
"  Gregory  the  Seventh,  who  may  be 
adored  or  detested  o«  ihe  founder  of  the 
Papal  mouarchi/,  was  driven  from  Kome, 
and  died  in  exile  at  Salerno."  And  again 
(vol.  iii.  p.  353),  he  says  of  Gregor}-, 
"  After  a  long  series  of  scandal,  the  apos- 
tolic See  was  reformed  and  exalted,  by 
the  austerity  and  zeal  of  Gregory  VII. 
That  ambitious  monk  devoted  his  life  to 
the  execution  of  two  projects  :  I.  To  fix 
in  the  college  of  Cardinals  the  freedom 
and  independence  of  election,  and  for 
ever  to  abolish  the  right  or  usurpation  of 
the  emperors  and  the  Roman  people. 
II.  To  bestow  and  resume  the  Western 
empire  as  a  fief  or  benefice  of  the  church, 
and  to  extend  his  temporal  dominion 
over  the  kings  and  kingdoms  of  the  earth. 
After  a  contest  of  fifty  j'ears,  the  first  of 
these  designs  was  accomplished  by  the 
firm  support  of  the  ecclesiastical  order, 
whose  liberty  was  connected  with  that  of 
the  chief.  But  the  second  attempt, 
though  it  was  crowned  with  some  appa- 
rent and  partial  success,  has  been  vig- 
orously resisted  by  the  secular  power, 
and  finally  extinguished  by  the  imjjrove- 
ment  of  human  reason." 

If  the  views  above  suggested,  however, 
are  correct ;  or  if  wo  look  at  the  Papacy 
as  it  was  in  the  time  of  Hildebrand,  it 
must  be  apparent  that  this  was  not  the 
rise,  or  oriijin  of  that  peculiar  domination, 
Hut  was  only  the  carrying  out  and  com- 
pleting of  the  plan  laid  long  before  to  set 
up  a  temporal  dominion  over  mankind. 

It  should  be  added,  that  whichever  of 
the  three  first  periods  referred  to  be  re- 
garded as  the  time  of  the  rise  of  the  Papacy, 
if  we  add  to  them  the  prophetic  period  of 
1260  years,  we  are  now  in  the  midst  of 


scenes  on  which  the  prophetic  eye  rested, 
and  we  cannot,  as  fair  interpreters  of 
prophecy,  but  regard  this  mighty  domi- 
:iation  as  hastening  to  its  fall.  It  would 
seem  probable,  then,  that  according  to 
the  most  obvious  explanation  of  the  sub- 
ject, we  are  at  present  not  far  from  the 
termination  and  fall  of  that  great  power, 
and  that  events  may  be  expected  to  oc- 
cur at  about  this  period  of  the  world 
which  will  be  connected  with  its  fall. 

(B)  Its  power  is  to  be  taken  away  as 
by  a  solemn  judgment — as  if  the  throne 
was  set,  and  God  was  to  come  forth  to 
pronounce  judgment  on  this  power  to 
overthrow  it,  vs.  10,  ]],  26.  This  de- 
struction of  the  power  referred  to  is  to  be 
absolute  and  entire — as  if  the  "beast 
were  slain,  and  the  body  given  to  the 
burning  flame" — "and  they  shall  take 
away  his  dominion,  to  consume  and  de- 
stroy it  unto  the  end."  This  would  de- 
note the  absolute  destruction  of  this  pe- 
culiar power — its  entire  cessation  in  tha 
world  ;  that  is,  the  absolute  destruction 
of  that  which  had  constituted  its  peculi- 
arity— the  prolonged  power  of  the  beast 
of  the  fourth  kingdom — concentrated  and 
embodied  in  that  represented  by  the  little 
horn.  If  applied  to  the  Roman  power, 
or  the  fourth  kingdom,  it  means  that 
that  power,  which  would  have  been  pro- 
longed under  the  dominion  of  that  repre- 
sented by  the  little  horn,  would  wholly 
cease — as  if  the  body  of  the  beast  had 
been  burned.  If  applied  to  the  power 
represented  by  the  '  little  horn' — the  Pa- 
pacy— it  means  that  that  power  which 
sprang  up  amidst  the  others,  and  which 
became  so  mighty — embodying  so  much 
of  the  power  of  the  beast,  would  wholly 
pass  away  as  an  ecclesiastico-civil  power. 
It  would  cease  its  dominion,  and  as  one 
of  the  ruling  powers  of  the  earth  would 
disappear.  This  would  be  accomplished 
by  some  remarkable  divine  manifesta- 
tion— as  if  God  should  come  in  majesty 
and  power  to  judgment,  and  should  pro- 
nounce a  sentence;  that  is,  the  overthrow 
would  be  decisive,  and  as  manifestly  the 
result  of  the  divine  interposition,  as  if 
God  should  do  it  by  a  formal  act  of  judg- 
ment. In  the  overthrow  of  that  power, 
whenever  it  occurs,  it  would  be  natural, 
from  this  prophecj",  to  anticipate  that 
there  would  be  some  scenes  of  commo- 
tion and  revolution  bearing  directly  on 
it,  as  if  God  were  pronouncing  sentence 
on  it ;  «ome   important  changes   in  the 


334 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  555, 


nations  that  Tiad  acknowledged  its  au- 
thority, as  if  the  great  Judge  of  nations 
■was  eoming  forth  to  assert  bis  own  power, 
and  his  own  right  to  rule,  and  to  dis- 
pose of  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth  as  he 
pleased. 

(C)  It  is  to  be  anticipated  that  the 
power  referred  to,  •will  be  destroyed  on 
account  of  its  pride  and  arrogance.  See 
Notes  on  ver.  11.  That  is,  whatever 
power  there  is  upon  the  earth  at  the  time 
referred  to  that  shall  be  properly  that  of 
the  fourth  beast  or  kingdom,  will  be 
taken  away  on  account  of  the  claims  set 
up  and  maintained  by  the  '  little  horn  :' — 
"  I  beheld  because  of  the  voice  of  the  great 
words  which  the  horn  spake;  I  beheld 
till  the  beast  was  slain,"  &c.,  ver.  11. 
On  the  supposition  that  this  refers  to  the 
Papacy,  what  is  to  be  expected  would  be, 
that  the  pride  and  arrogance  of  that 
power  as  such — that  is,  as  an  ecclesiasti- 
cal power  claiming  dominion  over  civil 
things,  and  wielding  civil  authority,  would 
be  such  that  the  Roman  power — the  lin- 
gering power  of  the  fourth  kingdom — 
would  be  taken  away,  and  its  dominion 
over  the  world  would  cease.  That  vast 
Roman  domination  that  once  trod  down  the 
earth,  and  that  crushed  and  oppressed 
the  nations,  would  still  linger,  like  the 
prolonged  life  of  the  beast,  until,  on  ac- 
count of  the  arrogance  and  pride  of  the 
Papacy,  it  would  be  wholly  taken  away. 
If  one  were  to  judge  of  the  meaning  of 
this  prophecy  without  attempting  to  ap- 
ply it  to  particular  passing  events,  he 
would  say  that  it  would  be  fullilled  by 
some  Eucli  events  as  these  : — if  the  peo- 
ple over  whom  the  prolonged  Roman 
civil  power  would  be  extended,  and  over 
whom  the  ecclesiastical  or  Papal  sceptre 
should  be  swayed,  would  on  acc-?unt  of 
the  pride  and  arrogance  of  the  Papacy 
rise  in  their  might,  and  demand  libertj- — 
that  would  be  in  fact  an  end  of  the  pro- 
longed power  of  the  fourth  beast;  and  it 
would  be  on  account  of  the  'great  words 
which  the  horn  spake,'  and  would  be  in 
all  respects  a  fulfilment  of  the  language 
of  this  prophecy.  Whether  such  an  end 
of  this  power  is  to  occur,  time  is  to  de- 
termine. 

(D)  Simultaneously  with  this  eveni,  as 
♦he  result  of  this,  we  are  to  anticipate 
snch  a  spread  of  truth  and  righteousness, 
ana  such  a  reign  of  the  saints  on  the 
earth,  as  would  be  properly  symbolized 
by  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  to  the 


Ancient  of  days  to  receive  the  kingdom, 
vs.  13,  14.  As  shown  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  those  verses,  this  does  not  neces- 
s.arily  imply  that  there  would  be  any  visi- 
ble appearing  of  the  Son  of  Man,  or  any 
personal  reign  (see  the  Notes  on  these 
verses),  but  there  would  be  such  a  mak- 
ing over  of  the  kingdom  to  the  Son  of 
Man  and  to  the  saints,  as  would  be  pro- 
perly s3'mbolized  by  such  a  representa- 
tion. That  is,  there  would  be  great 
changes ;  there  would  be  a  rapid  pro- 
gress of  the  truth ;  there  woidd  be  a 
spread  of  the  gospel ;  there  would  be  a 
change  in  the  governments  of  the  world, 
so  that  the  power  would  pass  into  the 
hands  of  the  righteous,  and  they  would 
in  fact  rule.  From  that  time  the  'saints' 
would  receive  the  kingdom,  and  the  af- 
fairs of  the  world  would  be  put  on  a  new 
footing.  From  that  period  it  might  bo 
said  that  the  reign  of  the  saints  would 
commence;  that  is,  there  would  be  such 
changes  in  this  respect  that  tJiat  would 
constitute  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  the 
world — the  proper  beginning  of  the  reign 
of  the  saints  on  the  earth — the  setting  up 
of  the  new  and  final  dominion  in  the 
world.  If  there  should  be  such  changes 
— such  marked  progress — such  facilities 
for  the  spread  of  truth — such  new  me- 
thods of  propagating  it — and  such  cer- 
tain success  attending  it,  all  opposition 
giving  way,  and  persecution  ceasing,  as 
would  properly  constitute  an  epoch  or  era 
in  the  world's  history  which  would  bo 
connected  with  the  conversion  of  the 
world  to  God,  this  would  fairly  meet  the 
interpretation  of  this  prophecy ;  this  oc- 
curring, all  would  have  taken  place  which 
could  be  fairly  shown  to  be  implied  in 
the  vision. 

(E)  We  are  to  expect  a  reign  of  righte- 
ousness on  the  earth.  On  the  character 
of  what  we  are  fairly  to  expect  from  the 
words  of  the  prophecy,  see  Notes  on  ver, 
14.  The  prophecy  authorizes  us  to  anti- 
cipate a  time  when  there  shall  be  a  gen- 
eral prevalence  of  true  religion;  when 
the  power  in  the  world  shall  be  in  the 
hands  of  good  men — of  men  fearing  God  ; 
when  the  divine  laws  shall  be  obeyed — 
being  acknowledged  as  the  laws  that  are 
to  control  men;  when  the  civil  institu- 
tions of  the  world  shall  bo  pervaded  by 
religion,  and  moulded  by  it;  when  there 
shall  be  no  hindrance  to  the  free  exercise 
of  religion,  and  when  in  fact  the  reign- 
ing power  on  the  earth  shall  be  the  king. 


B.C.  553.]  CHAPTER    VIII.  335 


dom  which  tho  Messiah  shall  set  up. 
There  is  nothing  more  certain  in  the  fu- 
ture than  such  a  period,  and  to  that  all 
things  are  tending.  Such  a  period  would 
fulfil  all  that  is  fairly  implied  in  this 
wonderful  prophecy,  and  to  that  faith  and 
hope  should  calmly  and  confidently  look 


forward.  For  that  they  who  lovo  their 
God  and  their  race  should  labour  and  pray; 
and  by  the  certain  assurance  that  such  a 
period  will  come,  we  should  bo  cheered 
amidst  all  the  moral  darkness  that  exists 
in  the  world,  and  in  all  that  now  discour- 
ages us  in  our  endeavours  to  do  good. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  CHAPTER. 


This  chapter  contains  an  account  of  a  Tision  seen  by  the  prophet  in  the  third  year  of  the 
reign  of  Belshazzar.  The  prophet  either  was,  or  appeared  to  be,  in  the  city  of  Shushan — after- 
wards the  capital  of  the  Persian  empire,  in  the  proTince  of  Elam.  To  that  place,  then  an  im- 
portant town,  there  is  no  improbability  in  supposing  that  he  had  gone,  as  he  was  then  uncon- 
nected with  the  government,  or  not  emploj-ed  by  the  government  (ch.  v.),  and  .is  it  is  not  un- 
reasonable to  suppose  that  he  would  be  at  liberty  to  visit  other  parts  of  the  empire  than  Baby- 
lon. Possibly  there  may  have  been  .lews  at  that  place,  and  he  may  have  pone  on  a  visit  to 
them.  Or  perhaps  the  scene  of  the  vision  may  have  been  laid  in  Shushan,  by  the  river  Ulai, 
and  that  the  prophet  means  to  represent  himself  as  if  he  had  been  there,  and  the  vision  had 
seemed  to  pass  there  before  his  mind.  But  there  is  no  valid  objection  to  the  supposition  that  he 
was  actually  there,  and  this  seems  to  be  affirmed  in  ver.  2.  While  there,  he  saw  a  ram  with 
two  horns,  one  higher  than  the  other,  pushing  westward,  and  northward,  and  southward,  so 
powerful  that  nothing  could  oppose  him.  As  he  was  looking  on  this,  he  saw  a  he-goat  come 
from  the  West,  bounding  along,  and  scarcely  touching  the  ground,  with  a  single  remarkable 
horn  between  his  eyes.  This  he-goat  attacked  the  ram,  broke  his  two  horns,  and  overcame  him 
entirely.  The  he-goat  became  very  strong,  but  at  length  the  horn  was  broken,  and  there  came 
up  four  in  its  place.  From  one  of  these  there  .'sprang  up  a  little  horn  that  became  exceeding 
great  and  mighty,  extending  itself  toward  the  South,  and  the  East,  and  the  pleasant  land — tho 
land  of  Palestine.  This  horn  became  so  mighty  that  it  seemed  to  attack  '  the  host  of  heaven' — • 
the  stars ;  it  cast  some  of  them  down  to  the  ground ;  it  magnified  itself  against  tho  Prince  of  the 
host ;  it  caused  the  daily  sacrifice  in  the  temple  to  cease,  and  the  sanctuary  of  the  Prince  of  the 
host  was  east  down.  An  earnest  inquiry  was  made  by  one  saint  to  another  how  long  this  was 
to  continue,  and  the  answer  was,  unto  two  thousand  and  three  hundred  days,  and  that  then  the 
sanctuary  would  be  cleansed.  Gabriel  is  then  sent  to  explain  the  vision  to  the  prophet,  and  he 
announces  that  the  ram  with  the  two  horns  represented  the  kings  of  Media  and  Persia;  the 
goat  the  king  of  Greece ;  the  great  horn  between  his  eyes  the  first  king ;  the  four  horns  that  should 
spring  up  after  that  was  broken,  the  four  dynasties  into  which  the  kingdom  would  be  divided, 
and  the  little  horn  a  king  of  fierce  countenance,  and  understanding  d.irk  sentences,  and  that 
would  stand  up  against  the  Prince  of  princes,  and  that  would  ultimately  be  destroyed.  The 
effect  of  this  was,  thfit  Daniel  was  overcome  by  the  vision  for  a  certain  time;  afterward  he  re- 
vive'!, and  attended  to  the  business  of  the  king,  but  none  understood  the  vision. 

This  is  one  of  the  few  prophecies  in  the  Scriptures  that  are  explained  to  the  prophets  them- 
selves, and  it  becomes,  therefore,  important  as  a  key  to  explain  other  prophecies  of  a  similar 
character.  Of  the  reference  to  the  kingdom  of  Media  and  Persia,  and  to  the  kingdom  of  Greece, 
there  is  an  express  statement.  The  application  of  a  portion  of  the  prophecy  to,Alexiinder  tho 
Great,  and  to  the  four  monarchies  into  which  his  kingdom  was  divided  at  his  death,  is  equally 
certain.  And  there  can  be  as  little  doubt  of  the  application  of  the  remainder  to  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  and  in  this  nearly  all  expositors  are  agreed.  Indeed,  so  striking  and  clear  is  the 
application  to  this  series  of  historical  events,  that  Porphyry  maintained  that  this,  as  well  as 
other  portions  of  Daniel,  were  written  after  the  events  occurred.  One  of  two  things,  indeed,  is 
certain — either  that  this  was  written  after  the  events  here  referred  to  occurred  ;  or  that  Daniel 
•vas  inspired.  No  man  by  any  natural  sagacity  could  have  predicted  these  events  with  so  much 
accuracy  and  particularity. 

Tiie  portion  of  Daniel  which  follows  is  in  pure  Hebrew.  The  portion  of  the  book  from  tho 
fourth  verse  of  the  second  chapter  to  the  end  of  the  seventh  chapter  was  written  in  Chalde*. 
On  this  point  see  Intro.  §4.  HI.  (1). 


336 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  553. 


1  In  the  third  year  of  the  reign  1  2  And  I  saw  in  a  vision  ;  and  it 
of  king  Bolshazzar  a  vision  appeared  j  came  to  pass,  when  I  saw,  that  1 
unto  lue,  even  iinto  mo  Daniel,  after  was  at »  Shushan  wi  thepalace,which. 
that  which  appeared  unto  mo  at  the  is  in  the  province  of  Elam ;  and  I 
first.  I  ^Es.  1,  2. 


1.  In  the  third  year  of  the  reiijn  of  Bel- 
ehazzar.  In  regard  to  Belsh.izzar,  see 
Intro,  to  eh.  v.  §  2.  *l  A  vision  appeared 
unto  me.  This  vision  appears  to  have 
occurred  to  him  when  awake,  or  in  an 
ecstacy ;  the  former  one  occurred  when 
he  was  asleep,  ch.  vii.  1.  Comp.  vs.  17, 
18,  of  this  chapter,  where  the  prophet 
represents  himself  as  overpowered,  and 
as  falling  down  to  the  earth  on  account 
of  the  vision.  The  repi-eseutation  would 
seem  to  have  been  made  to  pass  before 
his  mind  in  open  daj%  and  when  he  was 
fully  awake.  Comp.  the  case  of  Balaam, 
Num.  xxiv.  4:  "Which  saw  the  vision 
of  the  Almighty,  falling  into  a  trance, 
out  having  his  eyes  open."  ^  After  that 
which  appeared  unto  me  at  the  first.  That 
occurred  in  the  first  year  of  Belshazzar, 
ch.  vii.  1. 

2.  And  I  saxc  in  a  vision.  I  looked  as 
the  vision  .ippeared  to  me  ;  or  I  saw  cer- 
tain things  represented  to  me  in  a  vision. 
On  the  word  vision,  see  Notes  on  ch.  i.  17. 
The  meaning  hero  would  seem  to  be  that 
a  vision  appeared  to  Daniel,  and  that  he 
contemplated  it  with  earnestness  to  un- 
derstand what  it  meant.  •[  That  I  was 
at  Shuihan.  As  remarked  in  the  intro- 
duction to  this  chapter,  this  might  mean 
that  he  seemed  to  be  there,  or  that  the 
vision  was  represented  to  him  as  being 
there,  but  the  most  natural  construction 
is  to  suppose  that  Daniel  was  actually 
there  himself.  ^Vhy  he  was  there,  he 
has  not  informed  us  directl}',  whether  he 
was  on  public  business,  or  on  his  own. 
From  ver.  27,  however — 'Afterward  I 
rose  lip,  and  did  the  king's  business' — 
it  would  seem  most  probable  that  he  was 
then  in  the  service  of  the  king.  This 
t>upposition  will  not  conflict  with  the 
statement  in  th.  v.  10,  11,  in  which  the 
queen  of  Belshazzar,  when  the  hand  writ- 
ing appeared  on  the  wall  of  the  palace, 
informs  the  king  that  there  was  "  a  man 
in  his  kingdom  in  which  was  the  spirit 
of  the  holy  gods,"  <tc. — from  which  it 
might  be  objected  that  Daniel  was  at  that 
time  unknown  to  the  king,  and  could  not 
have  been  in  his  employ,  for  it  might  have 
been  afact  thathe  was  in  the  employ  of  the 


king  as  an  oflBcer  of  the  government,  and 
yet  it  niaj'  have  been  forgotten  that  ho 
had  this  power  of  disclosing  the  meaning 
of  visions.  He  may  have  been  employed 
in  the  public  service,  but  his  services  to 
the  father  of  the  king,  and  his  extraordi- 
narj' skill  in  interpreting  dreams  and  vis- 
ions may  not  at  once  have  occurred  to  the 
affrighted  monarch  and  his  courtiers. 
Shushan,  or  Susa,  the  chief  town  of  Susi- 
ana,  was  the  capitol  of  Persia  after  the 
time  of  Cyrus,  in  which  the  kings  of  Per- 
sia had  their  principal  residence.  Neh  i.  1. 
Esther  i.  2 — 5.  It  was  situated  on  the 
Eulaeus  or  Choaspes,  probably  on  the  spot 
now  occupied  by  the  village  Shus.  Ken- 
nel, Geog.  of  Herodotus;  Kinneir,  Mem. 
Pers.  Empire ;  K.  Porter's  Travels,  II. 
4,11;  Hitter,  Erdkunde,  Asien,  ix.  294. 
Pict.  Bib.  in  loc.  At  Shus  there  are  ex- 
tensive ruins,  stretching  perhaps  twelve  ■ 
miles  from  one  extremity  to  the  other,  and 
j  consisting,  with  the  other  ruins  in  that 
'  country,  of  hillocks  of  earth,  and  rubbish, 
covered  with  broken  pieces  of  brick  and 
j  coloured  tile.  At  the  foot  of  these  mounds 
lis  tte  so-called  tomb  of  Daniel,  a  small 
,  building  erected  on  the  spot  where  tho 
I  remains  of  Daniel  are  believed  in  that  re- 
gion to  rest.  It  is  apparently  modern, 
but  nothing  but  the  belief  that  this  was 
the  site  of  the  prophet's  sepulchre  could 
have  led  to  its  being  built  in  the  place 
where  it  stands.  Malcom,  Hist,  of  Per- 
sia, i.  255,  25G.  The  city  of  Shus  is  now 
a  gloomy  wilderness,  inhabited  by  lions, 
hyenas,  and  other  beasts  of  prey.  Kitto, 
Cyclop.  Art.  Shushan.  Sir  John  Kin- 
neir says  that  the  dread  of  these  animaly 
compelled  Mr.  Monteith  and  himself  to 
take  shelter  for  the  night  within  the  walls 
that  encompass  Daniel's  tomb.  Of  that 
tomb,  Sir  John  Malcolm  says,  "It  is  a 
small  building,  but  sufficient  to  shelter 
some  dervishes  who  watch  the  remains  of 
the  prophet,  and  are  supported  by  the 
alms  of  pious  pilgrims,  who  visit  the 
holy  sepulchre.  The  dervishes  aie  now 
the  only  inhabitants  of  Susa;  and  every 
species  of  wild  beast  roams  at  large  over 
the  spot  on  which  some  of  tho  proudest 
palaces  ever  raised  by  human  art  ooc8 


B.  C.  553.] 


CHAPTER    VIII. 


^r 


saw  in  a  vision,  and  I  was  by  the 
river  of  Ulai. 


stood."  Vol.  I.  pp.  255,  256.  For  a  de- 
scription of  the  ruins  of  Susa,  see  Pict. 
Bib.  ill  loc.  This  city  was  about  450  Ro- 
man miles  from  Seleucia,  and  was  built, 
according  to  Pliny,  6.  27,  in  a  square  of 
about  120  stadia.  It  was  the  summer 
residence  of  the  Persian  kings,  (Cyrop. 
8,  6,  10),  as  they  passed  the  spring  in 
Ecbatana,  and  the  autumn  and  winter  in 
Babylon.  See  Lcngerke,  in  loc.  It  was 
in  this  city  that  Alexander  the  Great 
married  Stateira,  daughter  of  Darius  Co- 
d(nnanus.  The  name  means  a  lilu,  and 
was  probably  given  to  it  on  account  of 
its  beauty.  Lengerke.  Piosenmiiller  sup- 
poses that  the  vision  here  is  represented  to 
have  appeared  to  Daniel  in  this  city  be- 
cause it  would  be  the  future  capitol  of  Per- 
sia, and  because  so  much  of  the  vision  per- 
tained to  Persia.  See  Maurer,  in  loc. 
The  annexed  cut  represents  the  present 


3  Then  I  lifted  up  mine  eyea,  and 
saw,  and,  behold,  there  stood  before 

appearance  of  that  city.  ^  In  the  palace. 
This  word — ny2 — means  a  fortress,  a 
castle,  a  fortified  palace.  Gesenius.  See 
Neh.  i.  1,  Esth.  i.  5  ;  ii.  5  ;  viii.  14;  ix. 
6,  11,  12.  It  would  seem  to  have  been 
given  to  the  city  because  it  was  a  forti- 
fied place.  The  word  applied  not  only  to 
the  palace  proper,  a  royal  residence,  but 
to  the  whole  adjacent  city.  It  is  not  ne- 
cessary to  suppose  that  Daniel  was  in  the 
palace  proper,  but  only  that  he  was  in 
the  city  to  which  the  name  was  given. 
^  W/it'ch  is  in  the  province  of  Elam.  See 
Notes  on  Isa.  xi.  11.  This  province  was 
bounded  on  the  east  by  Persia  proper,  on 
the  west  by  Babylonia,  on  the  north  by 
Media,  and  on  the  south  by  the  Persian 
Gulf.  It  was  about  half  as  large  as  Per- 
sia, and  not  quite  as  large  as  England. 
Kitto's    Cyclo.      It   was    probably   con- 


quered by  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  in  the 
time  of  Belshazzar  was  subject  to  the 
Babj'lonian  dominion.  Shushan  had  been 
doubtless  the  capitol  of  the  kingdom  of 
Elam  while  it  continued  a  separate  king- 
dom, and  remained  the  capitol  of  the 
province  while  it  was  under  the  Babylo- 
nian yoke,  and  until  it  was  subdued  as  a 
part  of  the  empire,  by  Cyrus.  It  was 
then  made  one  of  the  capitols  of  the 
united  Medo-Persian  empire.  It  was 
when  it  was  the  capitol  of  a  province  that 
it  was  visited  by  Daniel,  and  that  he  saw 
the  -ision  there.  Possibly  ho  may  have 
dwe!  there  subsequently,  and  died  there. 
^  And  I  icas  hy  the  river  of  Ulai.  This 
river  flowed  b-'  the  city  of  Shushan  or  Su- 
29 


sa,  and  foil  into  the  united  stream  of  the 
Tigris  antl  the  Ennhrates.  It  is  called 
by  Pliny  (Nat.  Hist.  vi.  81)  Eulaens;  but 
it  is  described  by  Greek  writers  generally 
under  the  name  of  Choaspes.  Herod,  v. 
49.  Strabo,  xv.  p.  728.  It  is  now  known 
by  the  name  Kerah,  called  by  the  Turks 
Keraso.  It  passes  on  the  west  of  the  ru- 
ins of  Shus  (Susa),  and  enters  the  Shat- 
ul-Arab  about  twenty  miles  below  Korna 
Kinneir.  Geog.  Mem.  of  the  Persian  em- 
pire, pp.  96, 97.  See  Kitto's  Cyc.  Art.  Ulai. 
3.  Then  I  lifted  vp  mine  ci/cs  and  saw. 
And  saw  in  vision,  or  there  seemed  to  be 
before  me.  IT  There  stood  be/ore  the  river. 
On  the  bank  of  the  river.  %  A  ram, 
tchich  had  two  horns.     There  can  be  no 


338 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  553 


the  river  a  ram  which  hac  two  horns : 
and  the  tico  horns  were  high;  but 
one  was  higher  than  the  *  other,  and 
the  higher  came  up  last. 

4  I  saw  the  ram  pushing  west- 
ward, and  northward,  and  south- 
ward ;  so  that  no  beast  might  stand 

»  second. 

error  in  explaining  the  design  of  this  sym- 
bol, for  in  ver.  20,  it  is  expressly  said  that 
it  denoted  the  two  kings  of  Media  and  Per- 
sia. The  united  power  of  the  kindom  was 
denoted  by  the  ram  itself;  the  fact  that 
there  were  two  powers  or  kingdoms  com- 
bined by  the  two  horns  of  the  ram.  ^  And 
the  two  horns  were  hifjh.  Both  indicating 
great  power.  ^  Hitt  the  one  was  higher 
than  the  other,  and  (he  hiyher  came  vp  last. 
The  higher  horn  springing  up  last  denotes 
Persia,  that  became  the  more  mighty 
power  of  the  two,  so  that  the  name  J/e- 
dia  became  finally  almost  dropped,  and 
the  united  kingdom  was  known  in  Gre- 
cian history  as  the  Persian.  The  Median 
or  Assyrian  power  was  the  older,  but  the 
Persian  became  the  most  mighty. 

4.  I  saw  the  ram  pushing  iceslicard,  and 
northward,  and  southward.  Denoting  the 
conquests  of  the  united  kingdom.  The 
east  is  not  mentioned,  for  none  of  the  con- 
quests of  the  Medo-Persian  empire  ex- 
tended in  that  direction.  Yet  nothing 
could  better  express  the  conquests  actu- 
ally made  by  the  Medo-Persian  empire 
than  this  representation.  On  the  west 
the  conquests  embraced  Babylonia,  Mes- 
opotamia, Syria  and  Asia  Minor;  on  the 
north,  Colchis,  Armenia,  Iberia,  and  the 
regions  around  the  Caspian  sea ;  and  on 
the  south,  Palestine,  Ethiopia,  Egypt,  and 
Lybia.  Lengerhe.  This  Medo-Persian 
power  is  represented  as  coming  from  the 
east,  Isa.  xli.  2  :  "  Who  raised  up  the 
righteous  man  from  the  east,"  &,c.  Isa. 
xlvi.  11  :  "  Calling  a  ravenous  bird 
from  the  east,  &c.  ^  He  did  according  to 
his  will,  and  became  great.  This  expresses 
well  also  the  character  of  the  Medo-Per- 
sian empire.  It  extended  over  a  great 
part  of  the  known  world,  subduing  to  it- 
self a  large  portion  of  the  earth.  In  its 
early  conquests  it  met  with  no  successful 
opposition,  nor  was  it  staj'ed  until  it  was 
tubdued  by  Greece — as  at  Leuctra  and 
Marathon,  and  then  as  it  was  finally  over- 
thrown by  Alexander  the  Groat. 


before  him,  neither  was  there  any 
that  could  deliver  out  of  his  hand ; 
but  he  did  according  to  his  b  will, 
and  became  great. 

5  And  as  I  was  considering,  be- 
hold, a  he-goat  i^came  from  the  west 
on  the  face  of  the  whole  earth,  and 

bis.  10. 13, 14 ;  c.  5.  19.  11 ;  3, 16.      c  ver.  21. 

5.  And  as  I  was  considering.  As  I  was 
looking  on  this  vision.  It  was  a  vision 
which  would  naturally  attract  attention, 
and  one  which  would  not  be  readily  un- 
derstood. It  evidently  denoted  some 
combined  power  that  was  attempting 
conquest,  but  we  are  not  to  suppose  that 
Daniel  would  readily  understand  what 
was  meant  by  it.  The  whole  scene  was 
future — for  the  Medo-Persian  power  was 
not  yet  consolidated  in  the  time  of  Bel- 
shazzar,  and  the  conquests  represented 
by  the  ram  continued  through  many 
years,  and  denoted  by  the  he-goat  ex- 
tended still  much  further  into  futurity. 
^  Behold,  a  he-goat  came  from  the  trest. 
In  ver.  21,  this  is  called  the  'rough- 
goat.'  There  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the 
application  of  this,  for  in  ver.  21,  it  is  ex- 
pressly said  that  it  was  '  the  king  of 
Grecia.'  The  power  represented  is  that 
of  Greece  when  it  was  consolidated  under 
Alexander  the  Great,  and  when  he  went 
forth  to  the  subjugation  of  this  vast  Per- 
sian empire.  It  may  serve  to  illustrate 
this,  and  to  show  the  propriety  of  repre- 
senting the  Macedonian  power  by  the 
symbol  of  a  goat,  to  remark  that  this 
symbol  is  often  found,  in  various  ways, 
in  connection  with  Maeedon,  and  that, 
for  some  reason,  the  goat  was  used  as 
emblematic  of  that  power.  A  few  facts, 
furnished  to  the  Editor  of  Calmet's  Dic- 
tionary, by  Taylor  Combe,  Esq.,  will 
show  the  propriety  of  this  allusion  tp 
Macedonia  under  the  emblem  of  a  goat, 
and  that  the  allusion  would  be  readily 
understood  in  after  times.  They  are 
condensed  here  from  his  account  in  Tay- 
lor's Calraet,  V.  410—412.  (1)  Caranus, 
the  first  king  of  the  Macedonians,  com- 
menced his  reign  814  years  before  the 
Christian  era.  The  circumstance  of  his 
being  led  by  goats  to  the  city  of  Edessa, 
the  name  of  which,  when  he  established 
there  the  seat  of  his  kingdom,  ho  con- 
verted into  yEgce,  is  well  worthy  of  re- 
mark.     Urhem     Edessam,    oh    memoriam 


B.  C.  553.] 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


33a> 


touched  not  the  ground :  and  the 

"or,  none  toiichcdlma  in  the  earth. 
^  a  horn  of  sight. 

muneris,  jEcjas,  j)oi>ulnm  ul!](jcudas.  Jus- 
tin Lib.  vii.  c.  1.  The  adoption  of  tho 
goat  as  an  emblem  of  Macedon,  would 
have  been  early  suggested  b_v  an  important 
event  in  their  history.  (2)  Bronze  figures 
of  a  goat  have  been  found  as  the  symbol 
of  Macedon.  Mr.  Combe  says,  "  I  have 
lately  had  an  opportunity  of  procuring 
an  ancient  bronze  figure  of  a  goat  with 
one  horn,  which  was  the  old  symbol  of 
Macedon.  As  figures  representing  the 
types  of  ancient  countries  are  e.xtremely 
rare,  and  as  neither  a  bronze  nor  marble 
symbol  of  Macedon  has  been  hitherto 
noticed,  I  beg  leave  to  trouble  you  with 
the  few  following  observations,"  Ac.  He 
then  says,  "  The  goat  which  is  sent  for 
your  inspection,  was  dug  up  in  Asia 
Minor,  and  was  brought,  together  with 
other  antiquities,  into  this  country  by  a 
poor  Turk."  The  following  cut  is  a  re- 
presentation of  this  figure.     The  slightest 


inspection  of  this  figure  will  show  the 
propriety  of  the  representation  before 
us.  Mr.  Combe  then  says,  "  Not  only 
many  of  the  individual  towns  in  Mace- 
don and  Thrace  employed  this  type,  but 
the  kingdom  itself  of  Macedon,  which  is 
the  oldest  in  Europe,  of  which  we  have 
any  regular  and  connected  history,  was 
represented  also  by  a  goat,  with  this 
peculiarity,  that  it  had  but  one  horn." 
(3)  In  the    reign  of  Amyntas  the  first, 


goat  had  a  t  notable  horn  between 
his  eyes. 


nearly  300  years  after  Caranus,  and  about 
5-47  years  before  Christ,  the  Macedonians, 
upon  being  threatened  with  an  invasion, 
became  tributary  to  tho  Persians.  In 
one  of  tho  pilasters  of  Persepolis,  this 
very  event  seems  to  be  recorded  in  a 
manner  that  throws  considerable  light  on 
this  subject.  A  goat  is  represented  with 
an  immense  horn  growing  out  of  the 
middle  of  his  forehead,  and  a  man  in  a 
Persian  dress  is  seen  by  his  side,  hold- 
ing the  horn  with  his  left  hand,  by  which 
is  signified  the  subjection  of  Macedon. 
The  following  is  the  figure  referred  to, 
and  it  strikingly  shows    how  early  this 


340 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  553 


symbol  was  used.  In  the  reign  of  Ar- 
chelaus  of  Maccdon,  B.  C.  413,  there 
occurs,  on  the  reverse  of  a  coin  of  that 


king,  the  head  of  a  goat  having  only  ona 
horn.  Of  this  coin,  so  remarkable  for 
the  single  horn,  there  are  two  varieties, 


one,  No.  1,  engraved  by  Pellerin.  and  the  ■  the  late  Dr.  W.  Hunter.     (5)  "  There  is 
other,  No.  2,  preserved  in  the  cabinet  of  j  a  gem,"  says  Mr.  Combe,  "  engraved  in 


the  Florentine  collection,  -which,  as  it  con- 
firms what  has  been  already  said,  and 
has  not  hitherto  been  understood,  I  think 
worthy  of  mention.  It  will  be  seen  by 
the  drawing  of  this  gem  that  nothing 
more  or  less  is  meant  by  the  rani's  head 
with  two  horns,  and  the  goat's  head  with 
one,  than  the  kingdoms  of  Persia  and 
JIacedon,  represented  under  their  appro- 
priate sj'mbols.  From  the  circumstance, 
however,  of  these  characteristic  types 
being  united,  it  is  extremely  probable 
that  the  gem  was  engraved  after  the  con- 
quest of  Persia  by  Alexander  the  Great." 


rhcso  remarks  and  illustrations  will  show 
the  propriety  of  the  symbol  used  here, 
and  show  also  how  readily  it  would  be 


understood  in  after  times.  There  is  no 
evidence  that  Daniel  understood  that  this 
ever  had  been  a  sj'mbol  of  Macedonia,  or 
that,  if  he  had,  he  could  have  conjectured, 
by  any  natural  sagacity,  that  a  power  re- 
presented by  that  symbol  would  have 
become  the  conqueror  of  Media  and  Per- 
sia, and  every  circumstance,  therefore, 
connected  with  this,  only  shows  the  more 
clearly  that  he  was  under  the  influence 
of  inspiration.  It  is  affirmed  by  Jose- 
phus  (Ant.  B.  xi.  ch.  viii.)  that  when 
Alexander  was  at  Jorusalom,  the  pro- 
phecies of  Daniel  respecting  him  were 
L-hown  to  him  by  the  high  priest,  and 
that  this  fact  was  the  means  of  his  con- 
ferring important  favours  on  the  Jews. 
If  such  an  event  occurred,  the  circum- 
stances here  alluded  to  show  how  readily 
Alexander  would  recognize  the  reference 
to  his  own  country,  and  to  himself,  and 
how  probable  the  account  of  Josephus  is, 
that  this  was  the  means  of  conciliating 
him  towards  the  Jewish  people.  The 
credibility  of  the  account,  which  has  been 
called  in  question,  is  examined  in  New- 
ton  on  the  Prophecies,  pp.  24] — 246, 
^  On  the  face  of  the  uhole  earth.  He 
scorned  to  move  over  the  whole  world — • 
well  representing  the  movements  of  Alex- 


B.  C.  553.] 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


3^1 


G  And  he  came  to  the  ram  that 
had  two  horns,  which  I  had  seen 
standing  before  the  river,  and  ran 
unto  him  in  the  fury  of  his  power. 

ander,  who  conquered  the  known  world, 
and  who  is  said  to  have  wept  because 
there  were  no  other  worlds  to  conquer. 
^  And  touched  not  the  ground.  Marg., 
none  touched  him  in  the  earth.  The 
translation  in  the  text,  however,  is  more 
correct  than  that  in  the  margin.  lie 
seemed  to  bound  along  as  if  he  did  not 
touch  the  ground — denoting  the  rapidity 
of  his  movements  and  conquests.  A 
similar  description  of  great  beauty  occurs 
in  Virgil,  ^En.  vii.  80G,  seq.  of  Camilla : 

Cursu  peJum  prmvertere  ventos, 
Ill;i  vol  iatticta  segetis  per  summa  volarct 
Gramin.i,  ncc  teneras  cursu  Icesisset  aristas, 
A'el  mare  ptr  medium  fluctu  suspensa  tumeuti 
Ferret  iter,  eeleres  nee  tingeret  a;quore  plantas. 

Nothing  would  better  express  tho  rapid 
conquests  of  Alexander  the  Great,  than 
the  language  employed  by  Daniel.  He 
died  at  the  early  age  of  thirty-three,  and 
having  been  chosen  generalissimo  of  the 
Greeks  against  the  Persians  at  the  age 
of  twenty-one,  the  whole  period  occupied 
by  him  in  his  conquests ;  and  iir-his  pub- 
lic life,  was  but  tAvelve  years,  yet  in  that 
time  he  brought  tho  world  in  subjection 
to  his  arms.  A  single  glance  at  his  rapid 
movements  will  show  the  propriety  of 
the  description  here.  In  the  year  334 
13.  C,  he  invaded  Persia,  and  defeated 
tho  Persians  in  the  battle  of  the  Granicus ; 
in  the  year  333,  he  again  defeated  them 
at  the  battle  of  Issus,  and  conquered 
P.arthia,  Bactria,  Hyreania,  Sogdiana, 
and  Asia  Minor.  In  the  year  332, 
he  conquered  Tyre  and  Egypt,  and 
built  Alexandria.  In  the  year  331, 
he  defeated  Darius  Codomannus,  and  in 
330  completed  the  conquest  of  the  Per- 
sian empire.  In  the  year  328,  he  defeated 
Porus,  king  of  India,  and  pursued  his 
march  to  the  Ganges.  In  these  few  years, 
therefore,  he  had  overrun  nearly  all  the 
then  known  world,  in  conquests  more 
rapid  and  more  decisive  than  had  ever 
before  been  made.  ^  And  the  goat  had  a 
notahle  horn  between  his  eyes.  The  goat 
represented  the  Macedonian  power,  and 
all  this  power  was  concentrated  in  the 
person  of  Alexander — undoubtedly  do- 
noted  by  the  single  horn — as  if  all  tho 
power  of  Greece  was  concentrated  in  him. 
29  » 


7  And  I  saw  him  come  close  unto 
the  ram,  and  ho  was  moved  with 
choler  against  him,  and  smote  the 
ram,  and  brake  his  two  horns :  and 

The  margin  is,  a  horn  of  sight.  This 
corresponds  with  tho  Hebrew,  the  wcrd 
rendered  notable — niTn — meaning  pro- 
perly look,  apjyearance,  and  then  some- 
thing conspicuous,  or  remarkable.  The 
literal  translation  would  be,  a  horn  of 
apjyenrance ;  that  is,  conspicuous,  large. 
Gesenius,  Lex. 

6.  And  he  came  to  the  ram,  &c.  Rep- 
resenting the  Medo-Persian  power.  ^[  And 
ran  nnto  him  in  the  fur ij  of  his  power. 
Representing  tho  fierceness  and  fury  with 
which  Alexander  attacked  the  Persians 
at  the  Granicus,  at  Issus,  and  at  Arbela, 
with  which  he  invaded  and  overthrew 
them  in  their  own  country.  Nothing 
would  better  express  this  than  to  say 
that  it  was  done  in  '  the  fury  of  power.' 

7.  And  I  saw  him  come  close  unto  the 
ram.  The  ram  standing  on  the  banks  of 
the  Ulai,  and  in  the  very  heart  of  the  em- 
pire. This  representation  is  designed  un- 
doubtedly to  denote  that  the  Grecian 
power  would  attack  tho  Persian  in  its 
own  dominions.  Perhaps  the  vision  was 
represented  at  the  place  which  would  bo 
the  capital  of  the  empire  in  order  to  do- 
note  this.  *l  And  he  tens  moved  with 
choler  against  the  ram.  AVith  wrath  or 
anger.  That  is,  he  acted  as  if  he  were 
furiously  enraged.  This  is  not  an  impro- 
per representation.  Alexander,  though 
spurred  on  by  ambition  as  his  ruling  mo- 
tive, yet  might  be  supposed  without  im- 
propriety to  represent  the  concentrated 
wrath  of  all  Greece  on  account  of  the  re- 
peated Persian  invasions.  It  is  true  the 
Persians  had  been  defeated  at  Leuctr.i, 
and  at  Marathon,  and  at  Salarais,  and 
that  their  hosts  had  been  held  in  check 
at  Thermopyla;,  and  that  they  had  never 
succeeded  in  subduing  Greece,  and  that 
the  Grecians  in  defending  their  country 
had  covered  themselves  with  glory.  But 
it  is  true,  also,  that  the  wrongs  inflicted 
or  attempted  on  the  Greeks  had  never 
been  forgotten,  and  it  cannot  be  doubted 
that  tho  remembrance  of  these  wrongs 
was  a  motive  that  influenced  many  a 
Greek  at  the  battle  of  the  Granicus  and  Is- 
sus, and  at  Arbela.  It  would  be  one  of  the 
most  powerful  motives  to  which  Alexan- 
der could  appeal  in  stimulating  his  army. 


342 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  553 


there  was  no  power  in  the  ram  to 
stand  before  him,  but  he  cast  him 
down  to  the  ground,  and  stamped 
upon  him  ;  and  there  was  none  that 

f^  And  broke  his  tico  horns.  Completely 
prostrated  his  power— as  Alexander  did 
when  he  overthrew  Darius  Codomannus, 
and  subjugated  to  himself  the  Medo-Per- 
sian  empire.  That  empire  ceased  at  that 
time,  and  was  merged  in  that  of  the  son 
of  Philip.  *^  A)id  there  was  no  2^ower  in 
the  ram  to  stand  before  him.  To  resist  him. 
^  But  he  cast  him  doion  to  the  ground,  and 
ttampcd  iij/on  him.     An  act  strikingly  cx- 


could  deliver  the  ram  out  of  hi. 
hand. 

8  Therefore   the  h»-goat    waxed 
very  great :  and  when  he  was  strong, 


pressive  of  the  conduct  of  Alexander. 
The  empire  was  crushed  beneath  his 
power,  and,  as  it  were,  trampled  to  the 
earth.  ^  And  there  was  none  that  could 
deliver  the  ram  out  of  his  hand.  No  aux- 
iliaries that  the  Persian  empire  could  call 
to  its  aid  that  could  save  it  from  the  Gre- 
cian conqueror.  The  following  is  the 
usual  representation  of  the  head  of  Alex- 
ander the  Great. 


8.  Therefore  the  he-goat  waxed  very 
great.  The  Macedonian  power,  especiallj' 
under  the  reign  of  Alexander.  •[  And 
when  he  was  strong,  the  great  horn  w-as 
broken.  In  the  time,  or  at  the  period,  of 
its  greatest  strength.  Then  an  event  oc- 
curred which  broke  the  horn  in  which 
was  concentrated  its  power.  It  is  easy 
to  see  the  application  of  this  to  the  Ma- 
cedonian power.  At  no  time  was  the 
empire  so  strong  as  at  the  death  of  Alex- 


ander. Its  power  did  not  pine  away;  it 
was  not  enfeebled,  as  monarchies  are  of- 
ten, by  age,  and  luxury,  and  corruption ; 
it  was  most  flourishing  and  prosperous  just 
at  the  period  when  broken  by  the  death 
of  Alexander.  Never  afterwards  did  it 
recover  its  vigour;  never  was  it  consoli- 
dated again.  From  that  time  this  mighty 
empire,  broken  into  separate  kingdoms, 
lost  its  influence  in  the  world.  *\  And 
for  it  caine  vp  four  notable  ones.    In  the 


B.  C.  553.] 


CHAPTER  VIIi. 


343 


the  great  horn  was  broken  ;  and  for 
it  came  up  four  "notable  ones  to- 
ward the  four  winds  of  heaven. 


place  of  this  one  horn  in  which  all  the 
power  was  concentrated,  there  sprang  up 
four  others  that  were  distinguished  and 
remarkable.  On  the  word  notable,  see 
Notes  on  ver.  5.  This  representation 
would  lead  us  to  suppose  that  the  power 
which  had  thus  been  concentrated  in  one 
monarchy,  would  be  divided  and  distri- 
buted into  four,  and  that  instead  of  that  one 
power  there  would  bo  four  kingdoms  that 
would  fill  up  about  the  same  space  in  the 
world,  occupy  about  the  same  territory, 
and  have  about  the  same  characteristics 
— so  that  they  might  bo  regarded  as  the 
succession  to  the  one  dynasty.  The  same 
representation  we  have  of  this  one  power 
in  ch.  vii.  6:  "And  the  beast  had  four 
heads."  See  also  ch.  xi.  4:  "His  king- 
dom shall  be  broken,  and  shall  be  divided 
towards  the  four  winds  of  heaven."  This 
accords  with  the  accounts  in  history  of 
the  effect  of  Alexander's  death,  for  though 
the  kingdom  was  not  by  him  divided  into 
four  parts,  yet,  from  the  confusion  and 
conflicts  that  arose,  power  was  ultimately 
concentrated  into  four  dynasties.  At  his 
death,  his  brother  Aridajus  was  declared 
king  in  his  stead,  and  Perdiccas  regent. 
But  the  unity  of  the  Macedonian  power 
was  gone,  and  disorder  and  confusion, 
and  a  struggle  for  empire,  immediately 
succeeded.  The  author  of  the  books  of 
Maccabees  (1  Mac.  i.  7,  8,  9,)  says:  "So 
Alexander  reigned  twelve  years,  and  then 
died.  And  his  servants  have  rule  every 
one  in  his  place.  And  after  his  death, 
they  all  put  crowns  upon  themselves ;  so 
did  their  sons  after  them  many  years ; 
and  evils  were  multiplied  in  the  earth." 
Alexander  died  B.  C.  323  ;  Antipater  suc- 
ceeded Perdiccas,  B.  C.  321;  Ptolemy 
Lagus  the  same  year  took  possession  of 
Egypt;  Cassander  assumed  the  govern- 
ment of  Macedon,  B.  C.  317 ;  Seleucus 
Nicator  took  possession  of  Sj'ria,  B.  C. 
311;  in  305  B.  C.  the  successors  of  Alex- 
ander took  the  title  of  kings,  and  in  301 
B.  C.  there  occurred  the  battle  of  Ipsus, 
in  which  Antigonus,  who  reigned  in  Asia 
Minor,  was  killed,  and  then  followed  in 
that  year  a  formal  division  of  Alexander's 
empire  between  the  four  victorious  princes, 
Ptolemy,  Seleucus,  Cassander,  and  Lys- 
inachus.     This   great  battle  of  Ipsus,  a 


9  And  b  out  of  one  of  them  came 
forth  a  little  horn,  which  waxed  ex- 


s  0.  7.  6,  &c. 


'c.  11.  25,  Ac. 


city  of  Phrygia,  was  fought  between  An- 
tigonus and  his  son  Demetrius,  on  the 
one  side,  and  the  combined  forces  of  these 
princes  on  the  other.  Antigonus  had 
aimed  at  universal  sovereignty ;  he  had 
taken  and  plundered  the  island  of  Cy- 
prus ;  had  destroyed  the  fleet  of  Ptolemy 
Lagus,  and  had  assumed  the  crown. — 
Against  him  and  his  usurpations,  Pto- 
lemy, Cassander,  and  Lysinachus,  com- 
bined their  forces,  and  the  result  was  his 
complete  overthrow  at  the  battle  of  Ipsus. 
Lcngerke,  in  loc.  In  this  battle,  Antigo- 
nus lost  all  his  conquests  and  his  life. 
In  the  division  of  the  empire,  Seleucus 
Nicator  obtained  Syria,  Babylonia,  Me- 
dia and  Susiana,  Armenia,  a  part  of  Cap- 
padocia,  Celicia,  and  his  kingdom,  in  namo 
at  least,  extended  from  the  Hellespont  to 
the  Indies.  The  kingdom  of  Lysina- 
chus extended  over  a  part  of  Thrace, 
Asia  Minor,  part  of  Cappadocia,  and  th« 
countries  within  the  limits  of  Mount 
Taurus.  Cassander  possessed  Macedo- 
nia, Thessaly,  and  a  part  of  Greece. 
Ptolemy  obtained  Egypt,  Cyprus,  and 
Cyrene,  and  ultimately  Coclo-Syria,  Phce- 
nicia,  Judea,  and  a  part  of  Asia  Minor 
and  Thrace.  Lengerke,  in  loc.  ^[  To- 
icard  the  four  winds  of  heaven.  Towards 
the  four  quarters  of  the  world.  Thus  the 
dominions  of  Seleucus  were  in  the  East; 
those  of  Cassander  in  the  West ;  those  of 
Ptolemy  in  the  South,  and  those  of  Lys- 
inachus in  the  North. 

9.  And  out  of  one  of  them  came  forth  a 
little  horn.  Emblematic  of  a  new  power 
that  should  spring  up.  Comp.  Notes  on 
ch.  vii.  8.  'This  little  horn  sprang  up 
out  of  one  of  the  others ;  it  did  not  spring 
up  in  the  midst  of  the  others  as  the  little 
horn  in  ch.  vii.  8,  did  among  the  ten  oth- 
ers. This  seemed  to  grow  out  of  one  of 
the  four,  and  the  meaning  cannot  be  mis- 
understood. From  one  of  the  four  pow- 
ers or  kingdoms  into  which  the  empire  of 
Alexander  would  be  divided,  there  would 
spring  up  this  ambitious  and  persecuting 
power.  ^  Which  waxed  exceeding  great. 
Which  became  exceedingly  powerful.  It 
was  comparatively  small  at  first,  but  ulti- 
mately became  mighty.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  Antiochus  Epiphanes  is  de- 
noted here.     All    the  clrcumstancos  of 


344 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  553 


cecding  great,  toward  the  south,  and 

aPs.  4S.  2;  Eze.20. 15. 

the  prediction  find  a  fulfilment  in  him, 
and  if  it  ■were  supposed  that  this  was 
■written  after  he  had  lived,  and  that  ittvas 
the  design  of  the  ivriter  to  describe  him 
by  these  symbols,  he  could  not  have  found 
symbols  that  -would  have  been  more 
striking  or  appropriate  than  this.  The 
Syriac  version  has  inserted  hero,  in  the 
Syriae  text,  the  words  'Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes,'  and  almost  without  exception, 
expositors  have  been  agreed  in  the  opin- 
on  that  he  is  referred  to.  For  a  general 
account  of  him,  see  Notes  on  eh.  vii.  24, 
seq.  The  author  of  the  Book  of  Maccabees, 
after  noticing  in  the  passage  above  quoted, 
the  death  of  Alexander,  and  the  distrac- 
tions that  followed  his  death,  says,  "And 
there  came  out  of  them  a  wicked  root, 
Antiochus,  surnamed  Epiphanes,  son  of 
Antiochus  the  king,  who  had  been  a  host- 
age at  Rome,  and  he  reigned  in  the  hun- 
dred and  thirty  and  seventh  year  of  the 
kingdom  of  the  Greeks."  1  Mac.  i.  10. 
A  few  expositors  have  supposed  that  this 
passage  refers  to  Antichrist— what  will 
not  expositors  of  the  Bible  suppose  ?  But 
the  great  body  of  interpreters  have  under- 
stood itto  refer  to  Antiochus.  This  prince 
was  a  sviccessor  of  Seleucus  Nicator,  who, 
in  the  division  of  the  empire  of  Alexander, 
obtained  Syria,  Babylonia,  Media,  &c., 
(see  above  on  ver.  8),  and  whose  capitol 
was  Antioch.  The  succession  of  princes 
who  reigned  in  Antioch  from  Seleucus  to 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  was  as  follows  : 

1.  Seleucus  Nicator,  B.  C.  312—280. 

2.  Antiochus  Soter,  his  son,  280—261. 

3.  Antiochus  Theus,  his  son,  261— 247. 

4.  Seleucus  Callinicus,  his  son,  247 — 
226. 

5.  (Alexander),  or  Seleucus  Ceraunus, 
his  son,  226—223. 

6.  Antiochus  the  Great,  his  brother, 
22,3—187. 

7.  Seleucus  Philopator,  his  son,  187 — 
176. 

8.  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  his  brother, 
176 — 164.  Clinton's  Fasti  HeUenic{,T;iA. 
III.  appendix,  ch.  iii.  The  succession 
of  the  Syrian  kings  reigning  in  Antioch 
was  continued,  until  Syria  was  reduced 
to  the  form  of  a  Roman  province  by  Pom- 
pey,  B.  C.  63.  Seleucus  Philopator,  the 
immediate  predecessor  of  Antiochus,  hav- 
ing been  assassinated  by  one  of  his  cour- 


toward  the  ci.st,  and  toward  the  ploa^ 
sant  ="  land. 


tiers,  his  brother  Antiochus  hastened  tc 
occupy  the  vacant  throne,  although  the 
natural  heir,  Demetrius,  son  of  Seleucus, 
was  yet  alive,  but  a  hostage  at  Rome. 
Antiochus  assumed  the  name  of  Epi- 
phanes, or  Illustrious.  In  Dan.  xi.  21,  it 
is  intimated  that  he  gained  the  kingdom 
hy  flatteries ;  and  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  bribery,  and  the  promise  of  reward  tc 
others,  was  made  use  of  to  secure  his 
power.  See  Kitto's  Cyclo.  i.  168—170. 
Of  the  acts  of  this  prince  there  will  be  oc- 
casion for  a  fuller  detail  in  the  Notes  on 
the  remainder  of  this  chapter,  and  ch.  xi. 
^  Toivard  the  south.  Toward  the  coun- 
try of  Egypt,  &c.  In  the  year  B.  C.  171, 
he  declared  war  against  Ptolemy  Philo- 
metor,  and  in  the  year  170  he  conquered 
Egypt,  and  plundered  Jerusalem.  1  Mac. 
i.  16 — 19:  "Now  when  the  kingdom  was 
established  before  Antiochus,  he  thought 
to  reign  over  Egypt,  that  he  might  have 
the  dominion  of  two  realms.  Wherefore 
he  entered  Egypt  with  a  great  multitude, 
with  chariots,  and  elephants,  and  horse- 
men, and  a  great  navy.  And  made  war 
against  Ptolemee  king  of  Egypt:  but 
Ptolemee  was  afraid  of  him,  and  fled ;  and 
many  were  wounded  to  death.  Thus  they 
got  the  strong  cities  in  the  land  of  Egypt, 
and  he  took  the  spoils  thereof."  ^  And 
toicard  the  east.  Toward  Persia  and  the 
countries  of  the  east.  He  went  there — 
these  countries  being  nominally  subject 
to  him — according  to  the  author  of  the 
book  of  Maccabees  (1  Mac.  iii.  28 — 37), 
in  order  to  replenish  his  exhausted  treas- 
ury, that  he  might  carry  on  his  wars  with 
the  Jews,  and  that  he  might  keep  up  the 
splendour  and  liber.ality  of  his  court : 
"He  saw  that  the  money  of  his  treasures 
failed,  and  that  the  tributes  in  the  coun- 
try were  small,  because  of  the  dissension 
and  plague  which  he  had  brought  upon 
the  land,  and  ho  feared  that  he  should  not 
be  able  to  bear  the  charges  any  longer,  nor 
to  have  such  gifts  to  give  so  liberally  as 
ho  did  before,  wherefore  being  greatly 
perplexed  in  his  mind,  he  determined  to 
go  into  Persia,  there  to  take  the  tributes 
of  the  countries,  and  to  gather  much  mo- 
ney. So  the  king  departed  from  Anti- 
och, his  royal  citj',  the  hundred,  fifty  and 
seventh  year ;  and  having  passed  the  river 
Euphrates,  he  went  through    tie   high 


B  C.  553.] 


CHAPTER   VIII, 


345 


10  And  it  waxed  great,  even  »to 

the  host  ^  of  heaven ;    and    it   cast 

down  <=  some  of  the  host  and  of  the 

»  or,  against.     •>  Is.  14. 13.     <=  Itc.  12.  4. 
d  ver.  'Zo.  "  or,  against. 

countries."  ^  And  toward  the  pleasant 
land.  The  word  here  used — i2S — means 
properly  splendour,  beauty.  Isa.  iv.  2 ; 
.\.\iv.  16  ;  x.wiii.  1,  4,  5.  It  is  applied  in 
1.5a.  xiii.  19,  to  Babylon — 'the  (jlory  of 
kingdoms.'  Here  it  evidently  denotes  the 
land  of  the  Israelites,  or  Palestine — so 
often  described  as  a  land  of  beauty,  as 
flowing  with  milk  and  honey,  kc  This 
is  such  language  as  a  pious  Hebrew  would 
naturally  use  of  his  own  country,  an<l  es- 
pecially if  he  was  an  exile  from  it  as  Dan- 
iel was.  Nothing  more  would  bo  neces- 
sary to  designate  the  land  so  as  to  be 
understood,  than  such  an  appellation — as 
nothing  more  would  be  necessary  to  de- 
signate his  country  to  an  exile  from  China 
than  to  speak  of  '  the  flowery  land.' 
Antiochus,  on  his  return  from  Egypt, 
turned  aside  and  invaded  Judea,  and  ulti- 
mately robbed  the  temple,  destroyed  Jeru- 
salem, and  spread  desolation  through  the 
land.     See  1  Mac.  i. 

10.  And  it  wa.rcd  great.  It  became 
very  powerful.  This  was  eminently  true 
of  Antiochus,  after  having  subdued  Egypt, 
&c.  \  Even  to  the  host  of  heaven.  Marg., 
against.  The  Hebrew  word —  -\y_  — means 
to  or  nnto,  and  the  natural  idea  would 
seem  to  be  that  he  wished  to  place  him- 
self among  the  stars,  or  to  exalt  himself 
above  all  that  was  carthlj'.  Comp.  Notes 
on  Isaiah  xiv.  1.3:  "For  thou  hast  said 
in  thine  heart,  I  will  ascend  unto  heaven. 
I  will  exalt  my  throne  above  the  stars  of 
God,"  Lcngorke  supposes  that  the  mean- 
ing here  is,  that  he  not  only  carried  his 
conquests  to  Egypt  and  to  the  East,  and 
to  the  holy  land  in  general,  but  that  he 
made  war  on  the  holy  army  of  God — the 
priests  and  worshippers  of  Jehovah,  here 
gpoken  of  as  the  host  of  heaven.  So 
Maurer  understands  it.  In  2  Mac.  ix. 
10,  Antiochus  is  described  in  this  lan- 
guage :  "And  the  man  that  thought  a 
little  afore  he  could  reach  the  stars  of 
heaven,"  &c.  The  connection  would  seem 
to  demand  the  interpretation  proposed  by 
Lengerke  and  Maurer,  for  it  is  immedi- 
ately said  that  he  cast  down  some  of  the 
host  and  the  stars  to  the  ground.     And 


stars  to  the  ground,  and   stamped 
upon  them. 

11  Yea,    he   '^  magnified   himself 
even  e  to  the  prince  of  the  host,  and 


such  an  interpretation  accords  with  the 
!  language  elsewhere  used  of  the  priests 
and  rulers  of  the  Hebrew  people.  Thus 
in  Is.a.  xxiv.  21,  they  are  called  "tho 
!  host  of  tho  high  ones  that  are  high." 
j  See  Notes  on  that  passage.  This  lan- 
guage is  by  no  means  uncommon  in  tho 
Scriptures.  It  is  usual  to  compare  princes 
and  rulers,  and  especially  ecclesiastical 
rulers,  with  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars. 
Undoubtedly  it  is  the  design  here  to  de- 
scribe the  pride  and  ambition  of  Antio- 
chus, and  to  show  that  he  did  not  think 
any  thing  too  exalted  for  his  aspiration. 
None  were  too  high  or  too  sacred  to  bo 
secure  from  his  attempts  to  overthrow 
them,  and  even  those  who,  by  their  posi- 
tion and  character,  seemed  to  deserve  to 
be  spoken  of  as  suns  and  stars,  as  "  the 
host  of  heaven,"  were  not  secure.  ^  And 
it  cast  down  some  of  the  host  and  of  the 
stars  to  the  ground.  The  horn  seemed  to 
grow  up  to  the  stars,  and  to  wrest  them 
from  their  places,  and  to  cast  them  down 
to  the  earth.  Antiochus,  in  the  fulfilment 
of  this,  cast  down  and  trampled  on  the 
princes,  and  rulers,  and  people,  of  the  holy 
host  or  army  of  God.  All  that  is  implied 
in  this  was  abundantly  fulfilled  in  what 
he  did  to  the  Jewish  people.  Comp.  1 
Mac.  i.  and  2  Mac.  viii.  2.  f  And 
stampied  vpon  them.  "With  indignation 
and  contempt.  Nothing  could  better  ex- 
press the  conduct  of  Antiochus  towards 
the  Jews. 

11.  Yea,  he  magnified  himself  even  to 
the  prince  of  the  host.  Grotius,  Ephrwm 
the  Syrian,  and  others,  understand  this 
of  Onias  the  high  priest,  as  the  chief 
officer  of  the  holy  people.  Lengerko 
supposes  that  it  means  God  himself.  This 
interpretation  is  the  more  probable,  and 
the  idea  in  the  phrase  'prince  of  the  host' 
is,  that  as  God  is  the  ruler  of  the  host  of 
heaven — leading  on  the  constellations, 
and  marshalling  the  stars,  so  he  may  be 
regarded  as  the  ruler  of  the  holy  army 
here  below — the  ministers  of  religion, 
and  his  people.  Against  him  as  the  Ru- 
ler and  Leader  of  his  people  Antiochus 
exalted  himself,  particularly  by  attempt- 
ing to  change  his  laws,  and  to  cause  his 


346 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  553 


» by  him  the  daily  ^sacrifice  was  I  12  And  ca  host  was  given  hin 
taken  away,  and  the  place  of  his  '  against  the  daily  sacrifice  by  reason 
sanctuary  was  cast  down. 


'  or,  from. 


bEx.  29,  38. 


worship  to  cease.  ^  And  hi/  Jn'm.  Marg., 
'from  him.'  The  meaning  is,  that  the 
command  or  authoritj'  to  do  this  pro- 
ceeded from  him.  ^  The  daily  sacrifice 
xcns  taken  away.  The  sacrifice  that  was 
offered  daily  in  the  temple,  morning  and 
evening,  was  suspended.  A  full  account 
of  this  may  be  found  in  1  Mac.  i.  20 — 24, 
29—32,  44—60.  In  the  execution  of  the 
purposes  of  Antiochus,  he  "  entered  the 
sanctuary,  and  took  .away  the  golden  altar, 
and  the  candlestick,  and  all  the  vessels 
thereof;  and  the  table  of  shew-bread,  the 
pouring  vessels,  &c.,  and  stripped  the 
temple  of  all  the  ornaments  of  gold." 
After  two  years  he  again  visited  the  city, 
and  "  smote  it  very  sore,  and  destroyed 
much  people  of  Israel,  and  when  ho  had 
taken  the  spoils  of  the  city  be  set  it  on 
fire,  and  pulled  down  the  walls  thereof 
on  every  side."  Everything  in  Jerusalem 
was  made  desolate.  •'  Her  sanctuary  was 
laid  waste  like  a  wilderness,  her  feasts 
were  turned  into  mourning,  her  Sabbaths 
into  reproach,  her  honour  into  contempt." 
Subsequentlj',  by  a  solemn  edict,  and  by 
more  decisive  acts,  he  put  a  period  to  the 
worship  of  God  in  the  temple,  and  pol- 
luted and  defiled  every  part  of  it.  "For 
the  king  had  sent  letters  by  messengers 
unto  Jerusalem  and  the  cities  of  Judah, 
that  they  should  follow  the  strange  laws 
of  the  land,  and  forbid  burnt-offerings, 
and  sacrifices,  and  drink-offerings  in  the 
temple;  and  that  they  should  profane  the 
S.abbaths  and  festival  days;  and  pollute 
the  sanctuary  and  holy  people  ;  set  up 
altars,  and  groves,  and  chapels  of  idols, 
and  sacrifice  swine's  flesh,  and  unclean 
beasts;  that  they  should  also  leave  their 
children  uncircumcised,  and  make  their 
souls  abominable  with  all  manner  of  un- 
cleanness  and  profanation:  to  the  end 
they  might  forget  the  laws,  and  change 
all  the  ordinances."  1  Mac.  i.  44 — 49. 
It  was  undoubtedly  to  these  acts  of  Anti- 
ochus that  the  passage  before  us  refers, 
and  the  event  accords  with  the  words  of 
*he  prediction  as  clearly  as  if  what  is  a 
prediction  had  been  written  afterwards, 
and  had  been  designed  to  represent  what 
actually  occurred  as  a  matter  of  bisto- 
lical  record.     The  word  which  is  rendered 


or,  the  host  was  given  over  for  the  transgres- 
sion against  the  daily  sacrifice. 


'daily  sacrifice' — the  word  'sacrifice'  be- 
ing supplied  by  the  translators — Tipn  — 
means  properly  continuance,  perj^etuity, 
and  then  that  which  is  continuous  or  con- 
•tant — as  a  sacrifice  or  service  daily  oc- 
curring. The  word  sacrifice,  is  pro- 
perly inserted  here.  Gesenius,  Zex.  The 
meaning  of  the  word  here  rendered  'was 
taken  away' — onn — (Hophal  from  niT  to 
exalt,  to  lift  up),  here  is,  that  it  was 
lifted  vp,  and  then  was  taken  away  ;  t/iat 
is,  it  was  made  to  cease — as  if  it  had 
been  carried  away.  Gesenius.  ^  And 
the  place  of  his  sanctuary.  Of  the  sanc- 
tuary or  holy  place  of  the  '  Prince  of  the 
host,'  that  is,  of  God.  The  reference  is 
to  the  temple.  ^  Was  cast  down.  The 
temple  was  not  entirely  destroyed  by 
Antiochus,  but  it  was  robbed  and  rifled, 
and  its  holy  vessels  were  carried  away. 
The  walls  indeed  remained,  but  it  was 
desolate,  and  the  whole  service  then  was 
abandoned.  See  the  passages  quoted 
above  from  1  Mac. 

12.  And  a  host  wc(s  given  him.  The 
Vulgate  renders  this,  'and  strength — 
robur — was  given  him,'  &c.  Theodotion, 
'and  sin  was  permitted — c^dS/j — against 
the  sacrifice  ;  and  this  righteousness  was 
cast  on  the  ground ;  so  he  acted  and 
was  prospered.'  Luther  renders  it,  'and 
such  might  (or  power,  macht)  was  given 
him.'  The  Syriac  renders  it,  '  and 
strength  was  given  him,'  &c.  Bertholdt 
renders  it,  Statt  jcncs  siellte  ynan  den 
Greucl  aiif,  'instead  of  this  [the  temple] 
there  was  set  up  an  abomination.'  Dathe, 
'and  the  stars  were  delivered  to  him' — 
tradita  ei  fuerunt  astra,  sc  pojjuhis  Jii- 
daicus.  Maurer  understands  it  also  of 
the  Jewish  people,  and  interprets  it, 
'  and  an  army — exercitus — the  people  of 
the  Jews  was  delivered  to  destruction, 
at  the  same  time  with  the  perpetual  sacri 
fice,  on  account  of  wickedness,  that  is, 
for  a  wicked  thing,  or  for  impure  sacri- 
fices.' Lengerke  renders  it,  as  in  our 
translation,  '  an  host — ein  Hcer — was 
given  up  to  him  at  the  same  time  with 
the  daily  offering,  on  account  of  evil.' 
The  word  //ot( — N3X — is  doubtless  to  be 
\  taken  here  in  the  same  sense  as  in  ver. 


B.  C.  553.] 


CHAPTER   VIII. 


347 


of  trans2;ression,  and  it  cast  down  [  131f  Then  I  heard  one  saint 'speak 
tlio  truth  to  the  ground ;  and  it  ing,  and  another  saint  said  untc 
practised  and  prospered.  a^  P^^  ^  12 


10,  where  it  is  connected  with  heaven — 
'  the  host  of  heaven.'  If  it  refers  there 
to  the  Jewish  people,  it  doubtless  does 
here,  and  the  appellation  is  such  an  one 
as  would  not  unnaturally  be  used.  It  is 
equivalent  to  saying  '  the  army  of  the 
Lord,'  or  the  people  of  the  Lord,  and  it 
should  have  been  rendered  here,  '  and  the 
host  was  given  up  to  him ;'  that  is,  the 
people  of  God,  or  the  holy  people,  were 
given  into  his  hands.  ^  Against  the  daily 
sacrifice.  This  does  not  convey  any  clear 
idea.  Lengerke  renders  it,  sammt  den 
bestdndigen  opfe% — '  at  the  same  time 
with  the  permanent  sacrifice.'  He  re- 
marks that  the  preposition  SjJ;  — (rendered 
in  our  version  against)  ]jke  the  Greek 
erri,  may  denote  a  connection  with  any- 
thing, or  a  being  with  a  thing — Ziisam- 
menseyn — and  thus  it  would  denote  a 
union  of  time,  or  that  the  things  occurred 
together.  Gen.  xxxii.  12;  IIos.  xiii.  14; 
Amos  iii.  15.  Comp.  Gesenius,  Lex.  on 
the  word  Sij  3.  According  to  this,  the 
meaning  is,  that  the  'host,'  or  the  Jewish 
people,  were  given  to  him  at  the  same  time, 
or  in  connection  with  the  daily  sacrifice. 
The  conquest  over  the  people,  and  the 
command  respecting  the  daily  sacrifice, 
were  simultaneous.  Both  passed  into  his 
hands,  and  he  exercised  jurisdiction  over 
them  both.  ^By  reason  of  transgression — 
yrsa-  That  is,  all  this  was  on  account 
of  the  transgression  of  the  people,  or 
on  account  of  abounding  iniquity.  God 
gave  up  the  people,  and  their  temple, 
and  their  sacrifices,  into  the  hands  of 
Antiochus,  on  account  of  the  prevailing 
impiety.  Comp.  1  Mac.  i.  11—16.  The 
author  of  that  book  traces  all  these 
calamities  to  the  acts  of  certain  wicked 
men,  who  obtained  permission  of  Anti- 
ochus to  introduce  heathen  customs  into 
Jerusalem,  and  who  actually  established 
many  of  those  customs  there.  *l  And 
•t  cast  down  the  truth  to  the  ground. 
The  true  system  of  religion,  or  the  true 
method  of  worshipping  God — represented 
here  as  truth  in  the  abstract.  So  in  Isa. 
lix.  14,  it  is  said  :  "  Truth  is  fallen  in  the 
street,  and  equity  cannot  enter."  The 
meaning  here  is,  that  the  institutions  of 
the  true  religion  would  be  utterly  pros- 


trate. This  was  fully  accomplished  by 
Antiochus.  See  1  Mac.  i.  ^  And  it  prac- 
tised. Heb.  '  it  did,'  or  it  acted.  That 
is,  it  undertook  a  work  and  was  success- 
ful. So  in  Ps.  i.  3,  where  the  same  ex- 
pression occurs :  "And  whatsoever  he 
doeth  shall  prosper."  This  was  fully 
accomplished  in  Antiochus,  who  was  en- 
tirely successful  in  all  his  enterprises 
against  Jerusalem.     See  1  Mac.  i. 

13.  Then  I  heard  one  saint  speaking. 
One  holy  one.  The  vision  was  now  ended, 
and  the  prophet  represents  himself  now 
as  hearing  earnest  inquiries  as  to  the 
length  of  time  during  which  this  desola- 
tion was  to  continue.  This  conversation, 
or  these  inquiries,  he  represents  himself 
as  hearing  among  those  whom  he  calls 
'  saints' — or  holy  ones —  ti'ilf;.  This  icord 
might  refer  to  a  saint  on  earth,  or  to  an 
angel — to  any  holy  being.  As  one  of 
these,  however,  was  able  to  explain  the 
vision,  and  to  tell  how  long  the  desola- 
tion was  to  continue,  it  is  more  natural 
to  refer  it  to  angels.  So  Lengerke  un- 
derstands it.  The  representation  is,  that 
one  holy  one,  or  angel,  was  heard  by  Daniel 
speaking  on  this  subject,  but  nothing  is  re- 
corded of  what  he  said.  It  is  implied 
only  that  he  was  conversing  about  the 
desolations  that  were  to  come  upon  the 
holy  city  and  the  people  of  God.  To  him 
thus  speaking,  and  who  is  introduced  as 
having  power  to  explain  it,  another  holy 
one  approaches,  and  asks  how  long  this 
state  of  things  was  to  continue.  The  answer 
to  this  question  (ver.  14)  is  made,  not  to 
tho  one  who  made  the  inquiry,  but  to 
Daniel,  evidently  that  it  might  be  re- 
corded. Daniel  does  not  say  tchere  this 
vision  occurred — whether  in  heavfn  or 
on  earth.  It  was  so  near  to  him,  how- 
ever, that  he  could  hear  what  was  said. 
*^  And  another  saint.  Another  holy 
one — probably  an  angel.  If  so,  we  may 
conclude,  what  is  in  itself  every  way  pro- 
bable, that  one  angel  has  more  knowledge 
than  another,  or  that  things  are  commu- 
nicated to  some  which  are  not  to  oth 
ers.  ^  Unto  that  certain  saint  which  spake, 
Palmoni,  or,  the  numhercr  of  secrets,  or, 
the  wonderfid  nwnherer.  The  Hebrew 
word — 'J^dS? — palmoni,  occurs  nowhere 


3^8 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  553 


3  that  certain  saint  -which  spake, '  transgression  of  >>  desolation,  to  give 
How  long  shall  he  the  vision  con-  both  the  sanctuary  and  the  host  to 
ceming  the  daily  sacrifice,  and  the  be  trodden  under  foot  ? 

14  And   he    said  unto  me,   Untc 

•"or,  maling  desolate;  c.  11.  31,  12.  11. 


"■  Palmcmi,  or,  the  numherer  of  secrets,  or,  the 
wonderful  numberer. 


else  in  the  Hebrew  scriptures.  The  simi- 
lar form — ''yhs — peloni,  occurs  in  Ruth 
iv.  1 :  "  Ho,  such  a  one,  turn  aside ;"  in 
1  Sam.  xxi.  2:  "appointed  my  servants 
to  such  and  such  a  place;"  and  2  Kings 
vi.  8  :  "In  such  and  such  a  place."  The 
Italic  words  denote  the  corresponding 
Hebrew  word.  The  word,  according  to 
Gesenius,  means  some  one,  a  certain  one  ; 
in  Arabic,  one  who  is  distinct  or  definite, 
whom  one  points  out  as  with  the  finger, 
and  not  by  name.  It  is  derived  from  an 
obsolete  noun,  pSs  — paloii,  from  the  verb, 
'^i?  —pnla,  to  distinguish,  and  is  united 
commonly  with  the  word  •'JdSx— mean- 
ing properly  one  concealed,  or  unknown. 
It  is  language,  therefore,  which  would  be 
properly  addressed  to  an  unknown  per- 
son with  whom  we  would  desire  to  speak, 
or  whom  we  would  designate  by  the  finger, 
or  in  some  such  way,  without  being  able 
to  call  the  name.  Thus  applied  in  the 
passage  here,  it  means  that  Daniel  did 
not  know  the  names  of  the  persons  thus 
speaking,  but  simply  saw  that  one  was 
speaking  to  another.  He  had  no  other 
way  of  designating  ordistinguishingthem, 
than  by  applying  a  term  which  was  com- 
monly used  of  a  stranger,  when  one  wished 
to  address  him,  or  to  point  him  out,  or  to 
call  him  to  him.  There  is  no  foundation 
in  the  word  for  the  meaning  suggested  in 
the  margin.  Theodotion  does  not  attempt 
to  translate  the  word,  but  retains  it— 
<pt\nov\ — Phelmoni.  The  Latin  Vulgate 
well  expresses  the  meaning,  dixit  vnns 
sanctiis  alteri  nescio  cui  loqucnti.  The 
full  sense  is  undoubtedly  conveyed  by  the 
two  ideas,  (n)  that  the  one  referred  to 
was  unknown  by  name,  and  (i)  that  he 
wished  to  designate  him  in  some  way,  or 
to  point  him  out.  *f,  Hoio  /o»(/ shall' be 
the  vision.  Concerning  the  daily  sacrifice. 
How  long  is  that  which  is  designed  to  be 
represented  by  the  vision  to  continue; 
that  is,  how  long  in  fact  will  the  offering 
of  the  daily  sacrifice  in  the  temple  be  sus- 
pended. *lAnd  the  transgression  of  deso- 
lation. Marg.,  makiny  desolate.  That  is, 
the  act  of  iniquity  on  the  part  of  Antio- 
Jhus  producing  such  desolation   in   the 


holy  city  and  the  temple — how  long  ia 
that  to  continue  ?  ^,  To  give  both  the 
sanctuary.  The  temple  ;  the  holy  place 
where  God  dwelt  by  a  visible  symbol,  and 
where  he  was  worshipped.  1  And  the 
host.  The  people  of  God — the  Jewish 
people.  ^  To  he  trodden  under  foot.  To 
be  utterly  despised  and  prostrated — as 
any  thing  which  is  trodden  under  our 
feet. 

14.  And  he  said  iinto  me.     Instead  of 
answering  the  one  who  made  the  inquiry, 
the  answer  is  made   to  Daniel,  doubtless 
that  he  might  make  a  record  of  it,  or  com- 
municate it  to   others.     If  it  had  been 
made  to  the  inquirer,  the  answer  would 
have  remained  with  him,  and  could  have 
been  of  no  use  to  the  world.     For  the  en- 
couragement, however,   of    the   Hebrew 
people,  when    their   sanctuary   and   city 
^vould  be  thus   desolate,  and  in  order  to 
furnish  an  instance  of  the  clear  fulfilment 
of  a  prediction,  it  was  important  that  it 
should   be   recorded,  and   hence   it  was 
made    to    Daniel.     ^  Unto   two  thousand 
and  three  hundred  days.     Marg.,  evening, 
morning.     So  the  Hebrew,  ip'J  2-\y\     So 
the  Latin  Vulgate,  ad  resjieram  et  mane. 
And  so  Theodotion — twf  ta-rrcpa;  Kal  irpuiX — ■ 
'to  the  evening  and  morning.'     The  lan- 
guage here  is  evidently  that  which  was 
derived  from  Gen.  i.,  or  which  was  com- 
mon among  the  Hebrews,  to  speak  of  the 
'  evening  and  the  morning'  as  constituting 
a  day.     There  can  bo  no  doubt,  however, 
that  a  day  is  intended  by  this,  for  this  is 
the  foir  and  obvious  interpretation.     The 
Greeks  were  accustomed  to  denote   the 
period  of  a  day  in  the  same  manner  by 
the  word  wx^imtpov  (see  2  Cor.  xi.  25),  in 
order  more  emphatically  to  designate  one 
complete  day.     See  Prof.  Stuart's  'Hints 
on  Prophecy,' pp.  99, 100.    The  time  then 
specified  by  this  would  be  six  years  and 
an  hundred  and  ten  days.    Much  difiiculty 
has  been  felt  by  expositors  in  reconciling 
this  statement  with  the  other  designations 
of  time  in  the  book  of  Daniel  supposed  to 
refer  to  the  same  event,  and  with  the  ae 
count  furnished  by  Josephus  in  regard  to 
the   period  which   elapsed   during  which 
the    sanctuary    was    desolate,   and    the 


B.  C.  553.] 


CHAPTER    VIII, 


349 


tvro   thousand   and   three   hundred  [*  days ;  then  shall  the  sanctuary  be 

"^rrening,  morning.  ^justified.  CleanSeu. 

daily  sacrifice  suspended.  The  other  de- 
signations of  time  which  have  been  suji- 
})osed  to  refer  to  the  same  event  in  Dan- 
iel, are  ch.  vii.  25,  where  the  time  men- 
tioned is  three  years  and  a  half — or 
twelve  hundred  and  sixty  days,  and  chap- 
ter xii.  7,  where  the  same  time  is  men- 
tioned, 'a  time,  times,  and  an  half,'  or 
three  years  and  an  half,  or,  as  before, 
twelve  hundred  and  six-ty  days,  and  ch. 
xii.  14,  where  the  period  mentioned  is  'a 
thousand  two  hundred  and  ninety  days,' 
and  ch.  xii.  12,  where  the  time  mentioned 
is  *  a  thousand  three  hundred  and  thirty 
days.'  The  time  mentioned  by  Josephus 
is  three  years  exactly  from  the  time  when 
'their  divine  worship  was  fallen  off,  and 
was  reduced  to  a  profane  and  common 
use,'  till  the  time  when  the  lamps  were 
lighted  again,  and  the  worship  restored, 
for  he  says  that  the  one  event  happened 
precisely  three  years  after  the  other,  on 
the  same  day  of  the  month.  Ant.  13.  xii. 
ch.  vii.  §  6.  In  his  Jewish  wars,  however, 
B.  i.  ch.  i.  §  1,  he  says  that  Antiochus 
'spoiled  the  temple,  and  put  a  stop  to  the 
constant  practice  of  offering  a  daily  sacri- 
fice of  expiation  for  three  years  and  six 
months.'  Now,  in  order  to  explain  the 
passage  before  us,  and  to  reconcile  the 
accounts,  or  to  show  that  there  is  no  con- 
tradiction between  them,  the  following 
remarks  may  be  made:  (1)  We  may 
lay  out  of  view  the  passage  in  ch.  vii.  25. 
See  Notes  on  that  passage.  If  the  rea- 
soning there  be  sound,  then  that  passage 
had  no  reference  to  Antiochus,  and  though, 
according  to  Josephus,  there  is  a  remark- 
able coincidence  between  the  time  men- 
*ioned  there  and  the  time  during  which  the 
daily  sacrifice  was  suspended,  yet  that  does 
not  demonstrate  that  the  reference  there  is 
to  Antiochus.  (2)  We  may  lay  out  of 
view,  also,  for  the  present,  the  passages  in 
ch.  xii.  11, 12.  Those  will  be  the  subject 
of  consideration  hereafter,  and  for  the 
present  ought  not  to  be  allowed  to  embar- 
rass us  in  ascertaining  the  meaning  of 
the  passage  before  us.  (3)  On  the  as- 
sumption, however,  that  those  passages 
refer  to  Antiochus,  and  that  the  accounts 
in  Josephus  above  referred  to  are  correct 
— though  he  mentions  different  times, 
and  though  different  periods  are  referred 
to  by  Daniel,  the  varie*ij  may  be  accounted 
SO 


for  by  the  supposition  that  separate  epochs 
are  referred  to  at  the  stctrtimj  jtoint  in  the 
calculation — the  terminus  a  quo.  The 
truth  was,  there  were  several  decisive 
acts  in  tlic  history  of  Antiochus  that  led 
to  the  ultimate  desolation  of  Jerusalem, 
and  at  one  time  a  writer  may  have  con- 
templated one,  and  at  another  time  an- 
other. Thus,  there  was  the  act  by  which 
Jason,  made  high  priest  by  Antiochus, 
was  permitted  to  set  up  a  gymnasium  in 
Jerusalem  after  the  manner  of  the  hea- 
then (Prideaux  iii.  216;  1  Mac.  i.  11 — 
15) ;  the  act  by  which  he  assaulted  and 
took  Jerusalem,  entering  the  most  holy 
place,  stripping  the  temple  of  its  treasures, 
defiling  the  temple,  and  offering  a  great 
swine  on  the  altar  of  burnt  offerings, 
(Prideaux  iii.  230,  231;  1  Mae.  i.  20—28) ; 
the  act,  just  two  years  after  this,  by 
which  having  been  defeated  in  his  expe- 
dition to  Egypt,  be  resolved  to  vent  all 
his  wrath  on  the  Jews,  and,  on  his  re- 
turn, sent  Apollonius  with  a  great  army 
to  ravage  and  destroy  Jerusalem — when 
Apollonius,  having  plundered  the  city, 
set  it  on  fire,  demolished  the  houses, 
pulled  down  the  walls,  and  with  the  ru- 
ins of  the  demolished  city  built  a  strong 
fortress  on  Mount  Acra  which  overlooked 
the  temple,  and  from  which  he  could  at- 
tack all  who  went  to  the  temple  to  wor- 
ship (Prideaux  iii.  239,  210;  1  Mac.  i. 
29—40) ;  and  the  act  by  which  Antiochus 
solemnly  forbade  all  burnt  offerings,  and 
sacrifices,  and  drink  offerings  in  the  tem- 
ple. Prideaux  iii.  241,  242 ;  1  Mac.  i.  44 
— 51.  Now,  it  is  evident,  that  one  writ- 
ing of  these  calamitous  events,  and  men- 
tioning how  long  they  would  continue, 
might  at  one  time  contemplate  one  of 
these  events  as  the  beginning — the  termi- 
nus a  quo,  and  at  another  time,  another 
of  these  events  might  be  in  his  eye. 
Each  one  of  them  was  a  strongly  marked 
and  decisive  event,  and  each  one  might 
be  contemplated  at  a  period  which,  in  an 
important  sense,  determined  the  destiny 
of  the  city,  and  put  an  end  to  the  wor 
ship  of  God  there.  (4)  It  seems  proba- 
ble that  the  time  mentioned  in  the  pas- 
sage before  us,  is  designed  to  take  in  th(i 
whole  series  of  disastrous  events,  from 
the  first  decisive  act  which  led  to  tho 
offering  the  daily  sacrifice,  or  the  ter- 


350 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  555 


mination  of  the  worship  of  God  there,  to  1 
the  time  when  the  'sanctuary  was  cleans- 
ed.' That  this  is  so,  would  seem  to  be 
probable  from  the  series  of  visions  pre- 
tented  to  Daniel  in  the  chapter  before  us. 
The  acts  of  the  'little  horn'  representing 
Antiochus,  as  seen  in  vision,  began  with 
his  attack  on  the  'pleasant  land'  (ver.  9), 
and  the  things  which  attracted  the  atten- 
tion of  Daniel  were,  that  ho  'waxed 
great,'  and  made  war  on  '  the  host  of 
heaven,'  and  '  cast  some  of  the  host  and 
of  the  stars  to  the  ground'  (ver.  10),  and 
'magnified  himself  against  the  prince  of 
the  host'  (ver.  11) — acts  which  refer 
manifestly  to  his  attack  on  the  people  of 
God,  and  the  priests  or  ministers  of  reli- 
gion, and  on  God  himself  as  the  'prince 
of  the  host' — unless  this  phrase  should  be 
understood  as  referring  rather  to  the  high 
priest.  AVe  are  then  rather  to  look  to  the 
whole  series  of  events  as  included  within 
the  two  thousand  and  three  hundred  days, 
than  the  period  in  which  literally  the  daily 
sacrifice  was  forbidden  by  a  solemn  sta- 
tute. It  was  practically  suspended,  and 
the  worship  of  God  interrupted  during 
all  that  time.  (6)  The  terminus  ad 
quern — the  conclusion  of  tho  period,  is 
marked  and  settled.  This  was  the  '  cleans- 
ing of  the  sanctuary.'  This  took  place, 
under  Judas  Maccabeus,  Dec.  25,  165  B. 
C.  Prideaux  iii.  265 — 268.  Now,  reck- 
oning hack  from  this  period  two  thousand 
and  three  hundred  days,  we  come  to  Au- 
gust 5,  171  B.  C.  The  question  is, 
whether  there  were  in  this  year,  and  at 
about  this  time,  any  events  in  the  series 
of  suSicient  importance  to  constitute  a 
period  from  which  to  reckon  ;  events  an- 
swering to  what  Daniel  saw  as  the  com- 
mencement of  the  vision,  when  'some  of 
the  host  and  the  stars  were  cast  down 
and  stamped  upon.'  Now,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  there  commenced  in  the  year  171 
B.  C,  a  series  of  aggressions  upon  the 
priesthood,  and  temple,  and  city  of  the 
Jews  on  the  part  of  Antiochus,  which  ter- 
minated only  with  his  death.  Up  to  this 
year,  the  relations  of  Antiochus  and  the 
Jewish  people  were  peaceful  and  cordial. 
In  the  year  175  B.  C,  he  granted  to  the 
Jewish  people,  who  desired  it,  permission 
to  erect  a  gymnasium  in  Jerusalem,  as 
above  stated.  In  the  year  173  B.  C, 
demand  was  made  of  Antiochus  of  the 
provinces  of  Ccele-Syria  and  Palestine  by 
the  young  Philometor  of  Egypt,  who  had 
just  come   to   the   throne,   and  by   his 


mother — a  demand  which  was  ths  origin 
of  the  war  between  Antiochus  and  the 
king  of  Egypt,  and  the  beginning  oi  all 
the  disturbances.  Prideaux  iii.  218.  In 
the  year  172  B.  C,  Antiochus  bestowed 
the  office  of  high  priest  on  Menelaus,  who 
was  the  brother  of  Jason  the  high  priest. 
Jason  had  sent  Menelaus  to  Antioch  to 
pay  the  king  his  tribute  money,  and 
while  there  Menelaus  conceived  the  de- 
sign of  supplanting  his  brother,  and  by 
offering  for  it  more  than  Jason  had,  ho 
procured  tho  appointment  and  returned 
to  Jerusalem.  Prideaux  iii.  220—222. 
Up  to  this  time  all  the  intercourse  of  An- 
tiochus with  the  Jews  had  been  of  a 
peaceful  character,  and  nothing  of  a  hos- 
tile nature  had  occurred.  In  171  B.  C. 
began  the  series  of  events  which  finally 
resulted  in  the  invasion  and  destruction 
of  the  city,  and  in  the  cessation  of  tho 
public  worship  of  God.  Menelaus,  having 
procured  the  high-priesthood,  refused  to 
pay  the  tribute  money  which  he  had  pro- 
mised for  it,  and  was  summoned  to  An- 
tioch. Antiochus  being  then  absent, 
Menelaus  took  advantage  of  his  absence, 
and  having,  by  means  of  Lysimachus, 
whom  he  had  left  at  Jerusalem,  procured 
the  vessels  out  of  the  temple,  he  sold 
them  at  Tyre,  and  thus  raised  money  to 
pay  the  king.  In  the  meantime,  Onias 
III.,  the  lawful  high-priest,  who  had  fled 
to  Antioch,  sternly  rebuked  Menelaus  for 
his  sacrilege,  and  soon  after,  at  the  insti- 
gation of  Menelaus,  was  allured  from  his 
retreat  at  Daphne,  where  he  had  sought 
an  asylum,  and  was  murdered  by  Andro- 
nicus,  the  vicegerent  of  Antiochus.  At 
the  same  time,  the  Jews  in  Jerusalem, 
highly  indignant  at  the  profanation  by 
Menelaus,  and  the  sacrilege  in  robbing 
the  temple,  rose  in  rebellion  against  Lysi- 
machus and  the  Syrian  forces  who  do- 
fended  him,  and  both  cut  off  this  'sacri- 
legious robber'  (Prideavix),  and  the  guards 
by  whom  he  was  surrounded.  This  as- 
sault on  the  ofiicer  of  Antiochus,  and  re- 
bellion against  him,  was  the  commence- 
ment of  the  hostilities  which  resulted  in 
the  ruin  of  the  city,  and  the  closing  of 
the  worship  of  God.  Prideaux  iii.  224 — 
226;  Stuart's  Hints  on  Prophecy,  p.  102. 
Here  commenced  a  series  of  aggressions 
upon  the  priesthood,  and  the  temple, 
and  the  city  of  the  Jews,  which,  with  oc- 
casional interruption  continued  to  the 
death  of  Antiochus,  and  which  led  to  all 
that  was  done  in  profaning  the  temple, 


B.  C.  553.] 


ClIAPTEIl   VIII, 


351 


15  ^  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  I, 
even  I  Daniel,  had  seen  the  vision, 
and  sought  for  the  meaning,  then, 

and  in  suspending  the  public  worship  of 
God,  and  it  is  doubtless  to  this  time  that 
the  prophet  here  refers.  This  is  the  nat- 
ural period  in  describing  the  series  of 
events  which  were  so  disastrous  to  the 
Jewish  people  ;  this  is  the  period  at  which 
one  who  should  now  describe  theni  as 
Aisfocy  would  begin.  It  may  not,  indeed, 
be  practicable  to  make  out  the  precise  num- 
ber of  clay.^,  for  the  exact  dates  are  not 
preserved  in  history,  but  the  calculation 
brings  it  into  the  year  171  B.  C,  the 
year  which  is  necessary  to  be  supposed  in 
order  that  the  two  thousand  and  three 
hundred  days  should  be  completed. 
Conip.  Lengerke,  in  loc.  p.  38S.  Various 
attempts  have  been  made  to  determine 
the  exact  number  of  the  days  by  historic 
records.  Bertholdt,  whom  Lengerke  fol- 
lows, determines  it  in  this  manner.  lie 
regards  the  time  referred  to  as  that  from 
the  command  to  set  up  heathen  altars  to 
the  victory  over  Nieanor,  and  the  solemn 
celebration  of  that  victory,  as  referred  to 
in  1  Mac.  vii.  4S,  49.  According  to  this 
reckoning,  the  time  is  as  follows  : — The 
command  to  set  up  idol  altars  was  issued 
in  the  year  145,  on  the  15th  of  the  month 
Kisleu.  There  remained  of  that  year, 
after  the  command  was  given, 
Half  of  the  month  Kisleu,  15  days 

The  month  Thebet,  30     " 

"  Shebath,  29     " 

"  Adar,  30     " 

The  year      146  354     '• 

"  147  354     " 

"  148  354     " 

"  149  354     " 

"  150  354    " 

The  year  151  to  the  13th  day 
of  the  month  Adar,  when 
the  victory  over  Nieanor  was 
achieved,  317     '' 

Two  intercalary  months  du- 
ring this  time,  according  to 
the  Jewish  reckoning  60     " 

2271 
This  would  leave  but  twenty-nine  days 
of  the  2300  to  be  accounted  for,  and  this 
would  be  required  to  go  from  the  place 
of  the  battle — between  Beth-Horon  and 
Adasa  (1  Mac.  vii.  39,  40)  to  Jerusalem, 
and  to  make  arrangements  to  celebrate 


behold,  there  stood  before  me  as  the 
appearance  of  a  man. 

16  And  I  heard  a  man's  voice  be- 


the  victory.  See  Bertholdt,  pp.  501 — 503. 
The  reckoning  here  is  from  the  time  of 
founding  the  kingdom  of  the  Seleueidas, 
or  the  era  of  the  Selucidae.  ^  Then  shall 
the  sanctuarij  he  cleansed.  Marg.  justified. 
The  Hebrew  word  pi^  — means  to  be  right 
or  straight,  and  then  to  be  just  or  right- 
eous;  then  to  vindicate  or  justify.  In 
the  form  here  used  (Niphal),  it  means  to 
be  declared  just;  to  be  justified  or  vindi- 
cated, and,  as  applied  to  the  temple  or 
sanctuary,  to  be  vindicated  from  violence 
or  injury;  that  is,  to  be  cleansed.  Seo 
Gesenius,  Lex.  There  is  undoubtedly 
reference  here  to  the  act  of  Judas  Macca- 
beus, in  solemnly  purifying  the  temple, 
and  repairing  it,  and  re-dedicating  it,  af- 
ter the  pollutions  brought  upon  it  by  An- 
tiochus.  For  a  description  of  this,  see 
Prideaux,  Connexion,  iii.  265 — 269.  Ju- 
das designated  a  priesthood  again  to 
servo  in  the  temple  ;  pulled  down  the  al- 
tars which  the  heathen  had  erected  ;  boro 
out  all  the  defiled  stones  into  an  un- 
clean place;  built  a  new  altar  in  place  of 
the  old  altar  of  burnt  offerings  which  they 
had  defiled;  hallowed  the  courts  ;  made 
a  new  altar  of  incense,  table  of  shew- 
bread,  golden  candlestick,  Ac,  and  sol- 
emnly re-consecrated  the  whole  to  tha 
service  of  God.  This  act  occurred  on 
the  twenty-fifth  day  of  the  ninth  month, 
(Kisleu),  and  the  solemnity  continued  for 
eight  days.  This  is  the  festival  which  is 
called  '■  the  feast  of  dedication"  in  the 
New  Testament  (John  x.  22),  and  which 
our  Saviour  honoured  with  his  presence. 
See  1  Mac.  iv.  41—58,  2  Mac.  x.  1—7. 
Josephus,  Ant.  B.  xii.  ch.  vii.  ^  6,  7. 

15.  And  it  came  to  pass,  &c.  Daniel 
saw  the  vision,  but  was  unable  to  explain 
it.  %  And  sought  for  the  meaning.  Evi- 
dently by  meditating  on  it,  or  endeavour- 
ing in  his  own  mind  to  make  it  out. 
^  There  stood  before  me  as  the  appearance 
of  a  man.  One  having  the  appearance  of 
a  man.  This  was  evidently  Gabriel  (ver, 
16),  who  now  assumed  a  human  form,  ana 
who  was  addressed  by  the  voice  from 
between  the  banks  of  the  Ulai,  and  com- 
menced to  make  known  the  meaning  of 
the  vision. 

16.  And  I  heard  a  man's  voice  bettceen 
the  banks  of  Ulai.    Notes  on  ver.  2.    The 


352 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  553 


tween  (lie  banJcs  of  Ulai,  which 
called,  and  said,  »  Gabriel,  make  this 
7nan  to  understand  the  vision. 

17  So  he  came  near  where  I  stood : 
and  when  he  came,  I  was  afraid, 
and  fell  upon  my  face :  but  he  said 


voice  seemed  to  come  from  the  river — as  if 
it  were  that  of  the  Genius  of  the  river,  and 
to  address  Gabriel,  who  stood  near  to  Dan- 
iel on  the  shore.  This  was  doubtless  the 
voice  of  God.  The  speaker  was  invisible, 
and  this  method  of  explaining  the  vision 
was  adopted,  probably  to  make  the  whole 
fcccnc  more  impressive.  ^  Winch  called, 
and  said,  Gabriel.  Gabriel  is  mentioned 
in  the  scripture  only  in  Daniel  viii.  16; 
ix.  21;  Luke  i.  19,  26.  In  Luke  i.  19,  he 
is  mentioned  as  saying  of  himself.  '•  I  am 
Gabriel,  that  stand  in  the  presence  of 
God."  The  word  means,  properly  :  "man 
of  God."  Nothing  more  is  known  of  him, 
and  he  is  mentioned  only  as  bearing 
messages  to  Daniel,  to  Zaoharias  the  fa- 
ther of  John  the  Baptist,  and  to  Mary. 
f  Make  t]us  man  to  understand  the  vision. 
Explain  it  to  him  so  that  he  will  under- 
stand its  meaning. 

17.  So  he  came  near  where  I  stood. 
He  had  seen  him,  evidently,  at  first  in 
the  distance.  He  now  drew  near  to  Dan- 
iel, that  he  might  communicate  with  him 
the  more  ^eadil3^  ^  And  when  he  came, 
I  was  a/aid,  and  fell  njion  my  face. 
Doubtless  perceiving  that  he  was  a  celes- 
tial being.  See  Notes  on  Rev.  i.  17. 
Comp.  Ezek.  i.  28,  and  Dan.  x.  8,  9. 
lie  was  completely  overpowered  by  the 
presence  of  the  celestial  stranger,  and 
sank  to  the  ground.  ^  But  he  said  unto 
me.  Understand,  0  eon  of  man.  Give 
attention,  that  j'ou  may  understand  the 
vision.  On  the  phrase  '  son  of  man,' 
ice  Notes  on  eh.  vii.  13.  It  is  here  sim- 
ply an  address  to  him  as  a  man.  ^\For  at 
the  time  of  the  end  shall  be  the  rision. 
The  design  of  this  expression  is  undoubt- 
edly to  cheer  and  comfort  the  prophet 
with  some  assurance  of  what  was  to  oc- 
cur in  future  times.  In  what  way  this 
was  done,  or  what  was  the  precise  idea 
indicated  by  these  words,  interpreters 
have  not  been  agreed.  Maurer  explains 
it,  '  for  this  vision  looks  to  the  last  time  ; 
that  is,  the  time  which  would  immediately 
precede  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  which 
would  be  a  time  of  calamity  in  which  the 


unto  me,  Understand,  0  son  of  man  t 
for  at  the  time  of  the  end  shall  hi 
the  vision. 

18  Now  as  he  was  speaking  with 
me,  I  wa^  in  a  deep  sleep  i"  on  my 

aLu.  1. 19,  2G.  be.  10. 9, 10. 


guilt  of  the  wicked  would  be  punished, 
and  the  virtue  of  the  saints  would  be 
tried,  to  wit,  the  time  of  Antioehua 
Epiphanes.'  Lengerke  supposes  that  the 
end  of  the  existing  calamities — the  suf- 
ferings of  the  Jews,  is  referred  to,  and 
that  the  meaning  is,  that  in  the  time  of 
the  Messiah,  to  which  the  vision  is  ex- 
tended, there  would  be  an  end  of  theii 
suSerings  and  trials.  The  design  of  the 
angel,  says  he,  is  to  support  and  comfort 
the  troubled  seer,  as  if  he  should  not 
be  anxious  that  these  troubles  were  to 
occur,  since  they  would  have  an  end, 
or,  as  Michselis  observes,  that  the  seer 
should  not  suppose  that  the  calamities 
indicated  by  the  vision  would  have  no 
end.  Perhaps  the  meaning  may  be  this: 
'The  vision  is  for  the  time  of  the  end;' 
that  is,  it  has  respect  to  the  closing  period 
of  the  world,  under  which  the  Messiah  is 
to  come,  and  necessarily  precedes  that, 
and  leads  on  to  that.  It  pertains  to  a 
series  of  events  which  is  to  introduce  tho 
latter  times,  when  the  kingdom  of  God 
shall  be  set  up  on  the  earth.  In  justifi- 
cntion  of  this  view  of  the  passage,  it  may 
be  remarked  that  this  is  not  only  the 
most  obvious  view,  but  is  sustained  by 
all  those  passages  which  speak  of  the 
coming  of  the  Messiah  as  'the  end,'  the 
'last  days,'  &c.  Thus  1  Cor.  x.  11: 
"upon  whom  the  ends  of  the  world  are 
come."  Comp.  Notes  on  Isa.  ii.  2.  Ac- 
cording to  this  interpretation,  the  mean- 
ing is,  'the  vision  pertains  to  the  end, 
or  the  closing  dispensation  of  things;' 
that  is,  it  has  a  bearing  on  the  period 
when  the  end  will  come,  or  will  introduce 
that  period.  It  looks  on  to  future  times, 
even  to  those  times,  though  now  remote 
(comp.  ver.  26),  when  a  new  order  of 
things  will  exist,  under  which  the  afFaira 
of  the  world  will  be  wound  up.  Comp, 
Notes  on  Heb.  i.  2. 

18.  Now  as  lie  teas  spcaJcing  with  »)ie, 
/  was  hi  a  deep  sleep  on  my  face  toward 
the  ground.  Overcome  and  prostrate  with 
the  vision.  That  is,  he  had  sunk  down 
stupefied  or  senseiess.    See  ch.  x.  9.    Uia 


B.  C.  553.] 


CHAPTER    VIII. 


353 


face  toward  the  ground :  but  he 
touched  me,  and  »  set  me  upright. 

lU  And  he  said,  Behold,  I  will 
make  thee  know  what  shall  be  in  the 
last  end  of  the  indignation  :  for  at 
the  time  appointed  ^  the  end  shall  be. 

20  The  ram  c  which  thou  sawest 
having  two  horns  are  the  kings  of 
Media  and  Persia. 

21  And   the   rough  goat   is  the 

strength  had  been  entirely  taken  away 
by  the  vision.  There  is  nothing  impro- 
bable in  this,  that  the  sudden  appearance 
of  a  celestial  vision,  or  a  heavenly  being, 
should  take  away  the  strength.  Comp. 
Gen.  XV.  12;  Job  iv.  13,  scq.;  Judg.  vi. 
22,  xiii.  22 ;  Isa.  vi.  5 ;  Luke  i.  12,  29, 
ii.  9  ;  Acts  ix.  3,  8.  ^  But  he  touched  me, 
and  set  me  vpri(jhf.  Marg.,  as  in  Heb., 
'made  me  stand  upon  my  standing.'  He 
raised  me  up  on  my  feet.  So  the  Saviour 
addressed  Saul  of  Tarsus,  when  he  had 
been  suddenly  smitten  to  the  earth,  by 
his  appearing  to  him  on  the  way  to  Da- 
mascus:  "Rise,  and  stand  upon  thy 
feet,"  &c.  Acts  xxvi.  16. 

19.  And  he  said.  Behold,  I  will  make 
thee  know  ichat  shall  be  in  the  last  end  of 
the  indignation.  In  the  future  time  when 
the  divine  indignation  shall  be  manifest 
toward  the  Hebrew  people  ;  to  wit,  by  suf- 
fering the  evils  to  come  upon  them  which 
Antiochus  would  inflict.  It  is  every- 
where represented  that  these  calamities 
would  occur  as  a  proof  of  the  divine  dis- 
pleasure on  account  of  their  sins.  Comp. 
ch.  ix.  21,  xi.  35  ;  2  Mac.  vii.  33.  ^  For  at 
the  time  appointed  the  end  shall  be.  It  shall 
not  always  continue.  There  is  a  definite 
peiiod  marked  out  in  the  divine  purpose, 
and  when  that  period  shall  arrive,  the 
end  of  all  this  will  take  place.  See  Notes 
on  ver.  17. 

20.  The  ram  tcJiich,  thou  saicest,  &c.  See 
Notes  on  ver.  3.  This  is  one  of  the  in- 
stances in  the  Scriptures  in  which  sym- 
bols are  explained.  There  can  be  no 
doubt,  therefore,  as  to  the  meaning. 

21.  And  the  rourjh  rjoaf.  Notes  on 
ver.  5.  In  ver.  5,  he  is  called  a  he-goat. 
Here  the  word  ro»^/i,  or  hairy — T'i'b'  — 
is  applied  to  it.  This  appellation  is  often 
given  to  a  goat.  Lev.  iv.  24,  xvi.  9 ;  Gen. 
xxxvii.  31.  It  would  seem  that  either 
term — a  hc-goat,  or  a  hairy-goat,  would 
eorve  to  designate  the  animal,  and  it  is 

soa- 


king of  Grecia :  and  the  great  horn 
that  is  between  his  eyes  is  the  first 
king. 

22  Now  that  being  broken,  where- 
as four  stood  up  for  it,  four  king- 
doms shall  stand  up  out  of  tue  na- 
tion, but  not  in  his  power. 

23  And  in  the  latter  time  of  theil 

^  made  me  stand  upon  my  standing. 
b  Uab.  2. 3 ;  Ke.  10.  7.  c  ver.  3. 

probable  that  the  terms  were  used  indis- 
criminately. ^  Is  the  Icing  of  Grecia. 
Represents  the  king  of  Greece.  The 
word  here  rendered  Grecia — fV — Javan, 
denotes  usually  and  properly  Ionia,  the 
western  part  of  Asia  Minor,  but  this 
name  was  extended  so  as  to  embrace  the 
whole  of  Greece.  See  iEschyl.  Acharn. 
501,  ibique  Schol.  Pers.  176,  561.  Ge- 
senius.  Lex.  The  Latin  Vulgate,  and 
Theodotion,  here  render  it  'the  king  of 
the  Grecians,'  and  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  the  royal  power  among  the  Greeks 
is  here  referred  to.  See  Notes  on  ver.  5. 
^  And  the  great  horn  that  is  between  his 
eyes  is  the  first  king.  Alexander  the 
Great.  The  first  that  consolidated  the 
whole  power,  and  that  was  known  in  the 
East  as  the  king  of  Greece.  So  he  is  ex- 
pressly called  in  1  Mac.  i.  1:  'The  first 
over  Greece.'  Philip,  his  father,  was 
opposed  in  his  attempts  to  conquer  Greece, 
and  was  defeated.  Alexander  invaded 
Greece,  burnt  Thebes,  compelled  the 
Athenians  to  submit,  and  was  declared 
generalissimo  of  the  Grecian  forces  against 
the  Persians. 

22.  A'ow  that  being  broken.  By  the 
death  of  Alexander.  ^  Whereas  four 
stood  vj:)  for  it.  Stood  up  in  its  place. 
^  Four  kingdoms  shall  stand  vp.  Ulti- 
matelj'.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose 
that  this  would  be  immediately.  If  four 
such  should  in  fact  spring  out  of  this  one 
kingdom,  all  that  is  implied  in  the  pro- 
phecy would  be  fulfilled.  On  the  fulfilment 
of  this,  see  Not«s  on  ver.  8.  ^  But  not  in 
his  power.  No  one  of  these  four  dynas- 
ties had  at  any  time  the  power  which 
was  wielded  by  Alexander  the  Great. 

23.  And  in  the  latter  timt  of  their  king, 
dom.  When  it  shall  be  drawing  to  an 
end.  All  these  powers  were  ultimately 
absorbed  in  the  Roman  power ,  and  the 
meaning  here  is,  that  taking  the  time 
from  the  period  of  their  formation — the 


i!54 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  553 


kingdom,  when  the  transgressors  are 
» come  to  the  full,  a  king  of  fierce 
countenance,     and     understanding 
dark  sentences,  shall  stand  up. 
24  And  his  power  shall  be  mighty, 

^accomplished. 

division  of  the  empire  after  the  bjittle  of 
Ipsus  (Notes  on  ver.  8),  till  the  time 
•when  all  would  be  swallowed  up  in  the 
Roman  dominion,  -what  is  here  stated — to 
•wit,  the  rise  of  Antiochus,  -would  be  in 
the  latter  portion  of  that  period.  The 
battle  of  Ipsus  was  fought  301  B.  C,  and 
the  Roman  power  was  extended  over  all 
those  regions  gradually  from  168  B.  C. — 
the  battle  of  Pydna,  when  Perseus  -was 
defeated,  and  Macedonia  was  reduced  to  a 
Roman  province,  to  30  B.  C, — when 
Egypt  was  subjected — the  last  of  these 
kingdoms  that  submitted  to  the  Roman 
arms.  Antiochus  began  to  reign  175  B. 
C. — so  that  it  was  in  the  latter  part  of 
this  period.  ^  When  the  transgressors 
are  come  to  the  full,  Marg.,  accomplished. 
That  is,  ■when  the  state  of  things — the 
prevalence  of  wickedness  and  irreligion 
in  Judea — shall  have  been  allowed  to 
continue  as  long  as  it  can  be — or  so  that 
the  cup  shall  be  full — then  shall  appear 
this  formidable  power  to  inflict  deserved 
punishment  on  the  guilty  nation.  The 
sacred  writers  often  speak  of  iniquity  as 
being /h^^ — of  the  cup  of  iniquity  as  be- 
ing full — as  if  there  -was  a  certain  limit 
or  capacity  beyond  which  it  could  not  be 
allowed  to  go.  When  that  arrives,  God 
interposes,  and  cuts  off  the  guilty  by  some 
heavy  judgment.  Comp.  Gen.  xv.  16  : — 
"  The  iniquity  of  the  Amorites  is  not  yet 
full."  Matt,  xxiii.  32  :  "  Fill  ye  up  then 
the  measure  of  your  fathers."  1  Thess.  ii. 
16 :  "  to  fill  up  their  sins  alway."  The 
idea  is,  that  there  is  a  certain  measure  or 
amount  of  sin  which  can  be  tolerated,  but 
beyond  that  the  divine  compassion  can- 
not go,  with  safety  to  the  universe,  or 
consistently  with  the  honour  of  God,  and 
that  the  punishment  maybe  expected; 
then  punishment  must  come.  This  is 
true,  doubtless,  of  individuals  and  nations, 
and  this  period  had  arrived  in  regard  to 
the  Jews  when  Antiochus  was  permitted 
to  lay  their  temple,  city,  and  country 
waste.  ^  A  king  of  fierce  countenance. 
otern  and  severe.  This  expression 
Would  be  applicable  to  many  who  have 


b  but  not  by  his  own  power :  an(? 
he  shall  destroy  wonderfully,  and 
''shall  prosper,  and  practise,  and 
shall  destroy  the  mighty  and  the 
d  holy  people. 

t'  Ke.  17. 13,  &.C.        <:  ver.  10, 12,  &e. 

^2)eople  of  the  holy  ones. 


held  the  kingly  office,  and  no  one  can 
doubt  that  it  may  be  applied  with  strict 
propriety  to  Antiochus.  \\  And  vnder- 
standing  dark  sentences.  Gesenius  (Lex.) 
explains  the  word  here  rendered  '  dark 
sentences'  to  mean  artifice,  trick,  strata- 
gem. This  will  better  agree  with  the 
character  of  Antiochus,  who  was  more 
distinguished  for  craft  and  policy  than  he 
was  for  wisdom,  or  for  explaining  enig- 
mas. The  meaning  seems  to  be  that  he 
would  be  politic  and  crafty,  seeking  to 
make  his  way,  and  to  accomplish  his 
purpose,  not  only  by  the  terror  that  he 
inspired,  but  by  deceit  and  cunning. 
That  this  was  his  character  is  well  known. 
Comp.  Notes  on  ver.  25.  ^  Shall  stand 
rip.  Shall  succeed,  or  there  shall  be  such 
a  king. 

24.  And  his  2)ower  shall  he  mighty.  He 
shall  be  a  powerful  monarch.  Though  not 
as  mighty  as  Alexander,  yet  his  conquests 
of  Egypt  and  other  places  show  that  he 
deserved  to  be  numbered  among  the 
mighty  kings  of  the  earth.  ^  But  not  hy 
his  own  poicer.  That  is,  it  shall  not  be 
by  any  strength  of  his  own,  but  by  the 
power  which  God  gives  him.  This  is 
true  of  all  kings  and  princes  (Comp.  John 
xix.  11 ;  Isa.  x.  b,seq.),  but  it  seems  to  be 
referred  to  here  particularly  to  show  that 
the  calamities  which  he  was  about  to 
bring  upon  the  Hebrew  people  were  by 
divine  direction  and  appointment.  This 
great  power  was  given  him  in  order  that 
he  might  be  an  instrument  in  the  divine 
hand  of  inflicting  deserved  punishment 
on  them  for  their  sins.  ^  And  he  shall 
destroy  iconderfully.  In  a  wonderful  or 
extraordinary  manner  shall  he  spread 
desolation.  This  refers  particularly  to 
the  manner  in  which  he  would  lay  waste 
the  holy  city,  and  the  land  of  Judea. 
The  history  in  the  books  of  Maccabees 
shows  that  this  was  literally  fulfilled. 
^  And  shall  2^>'ospcr.  Antiochus  was 
among  the  most  successful  kings  in  his 
various  expeditions.  Particularly  was 
he  successful  in  his  enterprises  against 
the  holy  land.     ^  And  practise,  Heb.,  do. 


a.  C.  553.] 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


355 


25  And  through  his  policy  also 
he  shall  cause  craft  to  prosper  in  his 
hand;  .and  ho  shall  magmfy  himseJf 
in  his  heart,  and  by  *  peace  shall 
destroy  many :  he  shall  also  stand 
*  or,  prosperity. 


That  is,  he  sh.ill  be  distinguished  not 
only  for  formvuj  plans,  but  for  executinr/ 
them;  not  merely  for  purposing,  but  fur 
doimj.  ^  And  shall  destroy  the  mighty 
and  the  holy  people.  The  people  of  God 
— the  Jewish  nation.  See  Notes  on  vs. 
9—12. 

25.  And  through  his  policy.  The  word 
rendered /)o?!"ci/  here — Ssy  — means,  pro- 
perly, intelligence,  understanding,  wis- 
dom, and  then,  in  a  bad  sense,  craft,  cun- 
ning. So  it  is  rendered  here  by  Gesenius, 
and  the  meaning  is,  that  he  would  owe 
his  success  in  a  great  measure  to  craft 
and  subtilty.  1[  He  shall  cause  craft  to 
prosper  in  his  hand.  He  shall  owe  his 
success  in  a  great  measure  to  a  crafty 
policy,  to  intrigue,  and  to  cunning. 
This  was  true  in  an  eminent  sense  of 
Antiochus.  See  his  history  in  Prideaux, 
above  referred  to,  and  the  books  of  Mac- 
cabees. Comp.  Notes  on  ch.  xi.  21.  The 
same  character  is  given  of  him  by  Poly- 
bius,  Relig.  lib.  xxxi.  c.  5.  Tom.  iv.  p. 
501.  Ed.  Schweighaeuser.  Appian,  de. 
reb.  Syr.  xlv.  T.  1.  p.  604.  Ed.  Schweigh. 
Comp.  2  Mac.  v.  24—26.  He  came  to  the 
kingdom  by  deceit  (Prideaux  III.  212), 
and  a  great  part  of  his  success  was  owing 
to  craft  and  policy.  ^  And  he  shall  mag- 
nify  himself  in  his  heart.  Shall  be  lifted 
up  with  pride,  or  esteem  himself  of  great 
consequence.  ^  And  by  jyeace  shall  de- 
stroy many.  Marg.,  pirosperity.  The  He- 
brew word —  rnSu' — means,  properly, 
tranquillity,  security,  ease,  carelessness. 
Here  the  phrase  seems  to  mean  '  in  the 
midst  of  security'  (Gesenius,  Lex.),  that 
is,  while  they  were  at  ease,  and  regarded 
themselves  as  in  a  state  of  safety,  he 
would  come  suddenly  and  unexpectedly 
upon  them,  and  destroy  them.  He  would 
make  sudden  war  on  them,  invading 
their  territories,  so  that  they  would  have 
no  opportunity  to  make  preparation  to 
meet  him.  Comp.  ch.  xi.  21,  24.  It 
would  seem  to  mean  that  he  would  en- 
deavour to  produce  the  impression  that 
he  waa  coming  in  peace ;  that  he  pre- 


up  against  the  Prince  (A  princes ; 
but  he  shall  be  broken  without  hand. 
2G  And  the  vision  of  the  evening 
and  the  morning  which  was  told  is 
true  :  wherefore  shut  ^  thou  up  the 
i"  Re.  10.  4. 


tended  friendship,  and  designed  to  keep 
those  whom  he  meant  to  invade  and  de- 
stroy in  a  state  of  false  security,  so  that 
he  might  descend  upon  them  unawares. 
This  was  his  policy  rather  than  to  declare 
war  openly,  and  so  give  his  enemies  fair 
warning  of  what  he  intended  to  do.  This 
description  agrees  every  way  with  the 
character  of  Antiochus,  a  leading  part  of 
whose  policy  always  was  to  preserve  the 
appearance  of  friendship,  that  he  might 
accomplish  his  purpose  while  his  enemies 
were  off  their  guard.  ^  He  shall  also 
stand  vp)  against  the  Prince  of  princes. 
Notes  ver.  11.  Against  God,  the  Ruler 
over  the  kings  of  the  earth.  ^  But  he 
shall  he  broken  without  hand.  That  is, 
without  the  hand  of  man,  or  by  no  visi- 
ble cause.  He  shall  be  overcome  by  a 
divine,  invisible  power.  According  to 
the  author  of  the  first  book  of  Maccabees 
(ch.  vi.  S — 16),  he  died  of  grief  and  re- 
morse in  Babylon.  He  was  on  an  expe- 
dition to  Persia,  and  there  laid  siege  to 
Elj'mais,  and  was  defeated,  and  fled  to 
Babylon,  when  learning  that  his  forces 
in  Palestine  had  been  repulsed,  pene- 
trated with  grief  and  remorse,  he  sick- 
ened and  died.  According  to  the  account 
in  the  second  book  of  Maccabees  (ix.),  his 
death  was  most  distressing  and  horrible. 
Comp.  Prideaux  III.  272—275.  All  the 
statements  given  of  his  death,  by  the  au- 
thors of  the  books  of  Maccabees,  by  Jose- 
phuR,  by  Polybius,  by  Q.  Curtius,  and  by 
Arrian  (see  the  quotations  in  Prideaux), 
agree  in  representing  it  as  attended  with 
every  circumstance  of  horror  that  can  be 
well  supposed  to  accompany  a  departure 
from  this  world,  and  as  having  every 
mark  of  the  just  judgment  of  God.  The 
divine  prediction  in  Daniel  was  fully  ac- 
complished, that  his  death  wculd  be  '  with- 
out hand,'  in  the  sense  that  it  would  not 
be  by  human  instrumentality,  but  that  it 
would  be  by  a  direct  divine  infliction. 
When  Antiochus  died,  the  opposition  to 
the  Jews  ceased,  and  their  land  again 
had  peace  and  rest. 

26.  And  the  vision  of  the  evening  and 


356  DANIEL. 

for   it   shall    he   for   many 


[B.  C.  55a 


vision 
days. 

27  And  I  Daniel  fainted,  and -was 
eick  certain  days ;  afterward  I  rose 

the  moniinij.  That  is,  of  the  two  thou- 
gand  three  hundred  days.  See  ver.  14, 
and  the  margin  on  that  verse.  The 
meaning  hero  is,  '  the  vision  pertaining 
to  that  succession  of  evenings  and  morn- 
ings.' Perhaps  this  appellation  was  given 
to  it  particularly  because  it  pertained  so 
much  to  the  evening  and  morning  sacri- 
fice. %  Is  true.  Shall  be  certainly  ac- 
complished. This  was  said  by  the  angel, 
giving  thus  to  Daniel  the  assurance  that 
what  he  had  seen  (vs.  9 — 14,)  was  no 
illusion,  but  would  certainly  come  to  pass. 
^  Wherefore  sJiut  thou  tip  the  vision  Seal 
it  up.  Make  a  record  of  it,  that  it  may 
bo  preserved,  and  that  its  fulfilment  may 
bo  marked.  See  Notes  on  Isa.  viii.  10. 
^  For  it  shall  ho  for  mnuy  chi>/s.  That  is, 
many  days  will  elapse  before  it  will  be 
accomplished.  Let  a  fair  record,  there- 
fore, be  made  of  it,  and  let  it  be  sealed  up, 
that  it  may  be  preserved  to  prepare  the 
people  for  these  events.  When  those 
things  would  come  thus  fearfully  upon  the 
people  of  Judea,  they  would  be  the  better 
able  to  bear  these  trials,  knowing  the  pe- 
riod when  they  would  terminate. 

27.  And  I  Daniel  fainted.  Heb.,  '  I 
was' — ''n\';n^.  Comp.  Dan.  ii.  1.  The 
meaning,  according  to  Gesenius  (Lex.) 
is,  '  I  was  done  up  and  was  sick ;' — I  was 
done  over,  &c.  Perhaps  the  reason  of 
his  using  this  verb  here  is,  that  he  repre- 
sents himself  as  having  been  sick,  and 
then  as  fainting  away,  as  if  his  life  had 
departed.  The  Latin  Vulgate  renders  it, 
langui.  Theodotion,  eKoifin^fiv — '  was  laid 
in  my  bed.'  The  general  idea  is  plain, 
that  he  was  overcome  and  prostrate  at 
the  effect  of  the  vision.  He  had  been 
permitted  to  look  into  the  future,  and  the 
scenes  were  so  appalling — the  changes 
that  were  to  occur  were  so  great — the  ca- 
lamities were  so  fearful  in  their  charac- 
ter, and,  above  all,  his  mind  was  so  af- 
fected that  the  daily  sacrifice  was  to  cease, 
and  the  worship  of  God  be  suspended, 
that  he  was  entirely  overcome.  And  who 
of  us,  probably,  could  hear  a  revelation 
of  what  is  to  occur  hereafter  ?  AVhere  is 
there  strength  that  could  endure  the  dis- 
closure of  what  may  happen  even  in  a 
few  years  ?     ^  And  was  sick  certain  dai/s. 


lip,  and  did  the  king's  business, 
and  I  was  astonished  at  the  vision, 
but  none  understood  it. 


The  exact  time  is  not  specified.  The  na- 
tural interpretation  is,  that  it  was  for  a 
considerable  period.  }\  Afterwards  1 7-089 
lip,  and  did  the  king's  business.  Comp. 
Notes  on  ver.  2.  From  this  it  would  ap- 
pear that  he  had  been  sent  to  Shushan  on 
some  business  pertaining  to  the  govern- 
ment. AVhat  it  was  we  are  not  informed. 
As  a  matter  of  fsxct,  he  was  sent  there  for 
a  more  important  purpose  than  any  which 
pertained  to  the  government  at  Babylon — 
to  receive  a  disclosure  of  most  momen- 
tous events  that  were  to  occur  in  distant 
times.  Yet  this  did  not  prevent  him  from 
attending  faithfully  to  the  business  en- 
trusted to  him — as  no  views  which  wo 
take  of  heavenly  things,  and  no  disclo- 
sures made  to  our  souls,  and  no  absorp- 
tion in  the  duties  and  enjoyments  of  re- 
ligion, should  prevent  us  from  attending 
with  fidelity  to  whatever  secular  duties 
may  bo  entrusted  to  us.  Sickness  justi- 
fies us,  of  course,  in  not  attending  to  them  ; 
the  highest  views  which  we  may  have  of 
God  and  of  religious  truth,  should  only 
make  us  more  faithful  in  the  discharge 
of  our  duties  to  our  fellow  men,  to  our 
country,  and  in  all  the  relations  of  life. 
He  who  has  been  favoured  with  the  clear- 
est views  of  divine  things,  will  be  none 
the  less  prepared  to  discharge  with  faith- 
fulness the  duties  of  this  life;  he  who  is 
permitted  and  enabled  to  look  far  into 
the  future  will  be  none  the  less  likely  to 
be  diligent,  faithful,  and  laborious  in 
meeting  the  responsibilities  of  the  present 
moment.  If  a  man  could  see  all  that 
there  is  in  heaven,  it  would  only  serve  to 
impress  him  with  a  deeper  conviction  of 
his  obligations  in  every  relation  ;  if  ho 
could  see  all  that  there  is  to  come  in  the 
vast  eternity  before  him,  it  would  only 
impress  him  with  a  profounder  sense  of 
the  consequences  which  may  follow  from 
the  discharge  of  present  duty.  ^  And  I 
was  astonished  at  the  vision.  He  was  stu- 
pefied— he  was  overcome — at  the  splendid 
appearance,  and  the  momentous  nature 
of  the  disclosures.  Comp.  Notes  on  ch. 
iv.  19.  ^  But  none  understood  it.  It 
would  seem  probable  from  this,  that  he 
communicated  it  to  others,  but  no  one 
was  able  to  explain  it.    Its  general  fea- 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER  IX, 


357 


tures  were  plain,  but  no  one  could  follow 
out  the  details,  and  tell  precischj  what 
would  oecur,  before  the  vision  was  ful- 
filled. This  is  the  general  nature  of 
prophecy ;  and  if  neither  Daniel  nor  any 
of  his  friends  could  explain  this  vision 
i*  detail,  are  we  to  hope  that  we  shall  be 
successful  in  disclosing  the  full  meaning 
of  those  which  are  not  yet  fulfilled  ?  The 
truth  is,  that  in  all  such  revelations  of 
the  future,  there  must  be  much  in  detail 
which  is  not  now  fully  understood.  The 
general  features  may  be  plain — as,  in 
this  case,  it  was  clear  that  a  mighty  king 
would  rise ;  that  he  would  be  a  tyrant; 
that  he  would  oppress  the  people  of  God  ; 
that  he  would  invade  the  holy  land  ;  that 
he  would  for  a  time  put  a  period  to  the 
offering  of  the  daily  sacrifice  ;  and  that 
this  would  continue  for  a  definite  period; 
and  that  then  he  would  be  cut  off  without 
human    instrumentality;   but  who   from 


this  would  have  been  able  to  draw  out,  in 
detail,  all  the  events  which  in  fact  oc- 
curred? Who  could  have  told  pre- 
cisely how  these  things  would  come  to 
pass  ?  AVho  could  have  ventured  on  a 
biography  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  ?  Yet 
these  three  things  are  true  in  regard  to 
this  :  (1)  that  no  one  by  human  sagacity 
could  have  foreseen  these  events  so  as  to 
have  been  .able  to  furnish  these  sketches 
of  what  was  to  be;  (2)  that  these  were 
sufficient  to  apprise  those  who  were  in- 
terested particularly,  of  what  would  oc- 
cur; and  (3)  that  when  these  events  oc- 
curred, it  was  plain  to  all  persons  that 
the  prophecy  had  reference  to  them.  So 
plain  is  this — so  clear  is  the  application 
of  the  predictions  in  this  Book,  that  Por- 
phyry maintained  that  it  w^as  written 
after  the  events  had  occurred,  and  that 
the  book  must  have  been  forged. 


CHAPTER  IX. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  CHAPTER. 


This  chapter  is  properly  dirlded  into  three  parts,  or  comprises  three  things : 

I.  The  inquiry  of  Daniel  into  the  time  that  the  desolations  of  Jerusalem  were  to  continue, 
and  his  determination  to  seek  the  Lord  to  pray  that  his  purpose  in  regard  to  the  restoration  of 
the  city  and  tt-mple  might  be  speedily  accomplished,  vs.  1 — 3.  Daniel  says  (ver.  1),  that  thii 
occurred  in  the  first  year  of  Darius  of  the  seed  of  tlie  Medes.  He  was  engaged  in  the  study  of 
the  books  of  Jeremiah.  He  learned  from  these  books  that  seventy  years  were  to  elapse  during 
which  the  temple,  the  city,  and  the  land  were  to  be  desolate.  By  a  calculation  as  to  the  time 
when  this  commenced,  he  was  enabled  to  ascertain  the  period  when  it  would  close,  and  he  found 
that  that  period  was  near,  and  that,  according  to  the  prediction,  it  might  be  expected  that  the 
time  of  the  restoration  was  at  hand.  His  mind  was,  of  course,  filled  with  the  deepest  solicitude. 
It  would  seem  not  improbable  that  he  did  not  perceive  .any  preparation  for  this,  or  any  ten- 
dency to  it,  and  it  could  not  but  be  that  he  would  be  filled  with  anxiety  in  regard  to  it.  He  does 
not  appear  to  have  entertained  any  doubt  that  the  predictions  would  be  fulfilled,  and  the  fact 
that  they  were  so  clear  and  so  positive,  was  a  strong  reason  why  he  should  pray,  and  was  the 
reason  why  he  prayed  so  earnestly  at  this  time.  The  prayer  which  he  offered  is  an  illustration 
of  the  truth  that  men  will  pray  more  earnestly  when  they  have  reason  to  suppose  that  God  in- 
tends to  impart  a  blessing,  and  that  an  a.ssura»ce  that  an  event  is  to  occur  is  one  of  the  strongest 
encouragements  and  incitements  to  prayer.  So  men  will  pray  with  more  faith  when  they  see 
that  God  is  blessing  the  means  of  restoration  to  health,  or  when  they  see  indications  of  an 
abundant  harvest ;  so  they  will  pray  with  the  more  fervour  for  God  to  bless  his  word  when  they 
see  evidences  of  a  revival  of  religion,  or  that  the  time  has  come  when  God  is  about  to  display 
his  power  in  the  conversion  of  sinners ;  and  so  undoubtedly  they  will  pray  with  the  more  earn- 
estness as  the  proofs  shall  be  multiplied  that  God  is  about  to  fulfil  all  his  ancient  predictions 
iu  the  conversion  of  the  whole  world  to  himself.  A  belief  th.at  God  intends  to  do  a  thing  ia 
never  an)'  hindrance  to  real  prayer ;  a  belief  that  he  is  in  fact  about  to  do  it  does  more  than 
anything  else  can  do  to  arouse  the  soul  to  call  with  earnestness  on  his  name. 

II.  The  prayer  of  Daniel,  vs.  4 — 19.  This  prayer  is  remarkable  for  its  .simplicity,  its  fervoui, 
its  appropriateness,  its  earnestness.  It  is  a  frank  confession  that  the  Hebrew  people,  in  whose 
name  it  was  offered,  had  deserved  all  the  calamities  which  had  come  upon  them,  accompanied 
with  earnest  iuterces.sion  that  God  would  now  hear  this  prayer,  and  remove  the  judgments  fronj 
thf  people,  and  accomplish  his  purpose  of  mercy  towards  the  city  and  temple.  The  long  cap- 
tivity of  nearly  seventy  yeais;  the  utter  desolation  of  the  city  and  temple  during  that  time; 


^58  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  53a 

the  numberless  privations  and  erils  to  which  during  that  period  they  had  been  exposed,  had 
demonstrated  the  greatness  of  the  sins  for  which  these  calamities  liad  come  upon  the  nation, 
and  Daniel  now,  in  the  name,  and  uttering  the  sentiments,  of  the  captive  people,  confessed 
their  guilt,  and  the  justness  of  the  divine  dealings  with  them.  Never  has  there  been  an  in- 
stance in  which  punishment  has  had  more  of  its  designi  d  and  appropriate  effect  than  in  prompt- 
ing to  the  sentiments  which  are  uttered  in  this  prayer:  and  the  prayer,  therefore,  is  just  the 
expression  of  what  we  shuidd  feel  when  the  hand  of  the  Lord  has  been  long  and  severely  laid 
upon  us  on  account  of  our  sins.  The  burden  of  the  prayer  is  confession  ;  the  object  which  he 
who  offers  it  seeks  is,  that  God  would  cause  the  severity  of  his  j  udgments  to  cease,  and  the  city  and 
templa  to  be  restored.  The  particular  points  in  the  prayer  will  be  more  appropriately  eluci- 
dated in  the  exposition  of  this  part  of  the  chapter. 

III.  The  answer  to  the  prayer,  vs.  20 — 2".  The  principal  difficulty  in  the  exposition  of  the  chapter 
is  in  this  portion  ;  and  indeed  there  is  perhaps  no  part  of  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament 
that  is,  on  some  accounts,  more  difficult  of  exposition,  as  there  is,  in  some  respects,  none 
more  clear,  and  none  more  important.  It  is  remarkable,  among  other  things,  as  not  being  a 
direct  answer  to  the  prayer,  and  as  seeming  to  have  no  bearing  on  the  subject  of  the  petition — 
that  the  city  of  Jerusalem  might  be  rebuilt,  and  the  temple  restored,  but  it  directs  the  mind 
onward  to  another  and  more  important  event — the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  and  the  final  closing 
of  sacrifice  and  oblation,  and  a  more  entire  and  enduring  destruction  of  the  temple  and  city, 
after  it  should  have  been  rebuilt,  than  had  yet  occurred.  To  give  this  information,  an  angel — 
the  same  one  whom  Daniel  had  seen  before,  was  sent  forth  from  heaven,  and  came  near  to  him 
and  touched  him,  and  said  that  he  was  commissioned  to  impart  to  him  skill  and  understanding, 
vs.  20 — 23.  "  The  speediness  of  his  coming  indicates  a  joyful  messenger.  The  substance  of  that 
message  is  as  follows :  As  a  compensation  for  the  seventy  years  in  which  the  people,  the  city, 
and  the  temple  had  been  entirely  prostrate,  seventy  weeks  of  years,  seven  times  seventy  years 
cf  a  renewed  existence  would  be  secured  to  them  by  the  Lord ;  and  the  end  of  this  period,  far 
from  bringing  the  mercies  of  God  to  a  close,  would  for  the  first  time  bestow  on  them  the  Theo- 
cracy in  their  complete  and  full  measure."  Ilengstenberg,  Chistology,  I.  293.  The  points  of 
information  which  the  angel  gives  in  regard  to  the  future  condition  of  the  city  are  these: 

(a)  That  the  whole  period  determined  in  respect  to  the  holy  city,  to  finish  transgression,  and 
to  make  an  end  of  sins,  and  to  make  reconciliation  for  the  people,  and  to  bring  in  everlasting 
righteousness,  and  to  seal  up  the  vision  and  prophecy,  and  to  anoint  the  Most  Holy,  was  seventy 
weeks — evidently  seventy  prophetic  weeks,  that  is,  regarding  each  day  as  a  year,  four  hundred 
and  ninety  years,  ver.  24.  The  time  when  this  period  would  commence — teiininus  a  quo — is 
not  indeed  distinctly  specified,  but  the  fair  interpretation  is,  from  that  time  when  the  vision 
appeared  to  Daniel,  the  first  year  of  Darius,  ver.  1.  The  literal  meaning  of  the  phrase  '  seventy 
weeks,'  according  to  Prof.  Stuart  (Hints  on  the  Interpretation  of  Prophecy,  p.  82),  is  seventy 
sevens,  that  is,  seventy  sevens  of  years,  or  four  hundred  and  ninety  years.  "Daniel,"  says  he, 
"  had  been  meditating  on  the  accomplishment  of  the  seventy  years  of  exile  for  the  Jews,  which 
Jeremiah  had  predicted.  At  the  close  of  the  fervent  supplication  for  the  people  which  he  makes, 
in  connection  with  his  meditation,  Gabriel  appears,  and  announces  to  him  that  ^seventy  sevens 
are  appointed  for  his  people,'  as  it  respects  the  time  then  future,  in  which  very  serious  and 
very  important  events  are  to  take  place.  Daniel  had  been  meditating  on  the  close  of  the  seventy 
years  of  Hebrew  exile,  and  the  angel  now  discloses  to  him  a  new  period  of  seventy  times  seven, 
in  which  still  more  important  events  are  to  take  place." 

(h)  This  period  of  seventy  sevens,  or  four  hundred  and  ninety  years,  is  divided  by  the  angel 
into  smaller  portions,  each  of  them  determining  some  important  event  iu  the  future.  He  says, 
therefore,  (ver.  25,)  that  from  the  going  forth  of  the  command  to  rebuild  the  temple,  until  the 
time  when  the  Messiah  should  appear,  the  whole  period  might  be  divided  into  two  portions — 
one  of  seven  sevens,  or  forty  nine  years,  and  the  other  of  threescore  and  tivo  sevens — sixty- 
two  sevens,  or  four  huudred  and  thirty-four  years,  making  together  four  hundred  and  eighty- 
three  years.  This  statement  is  accompanied  with  the  assurance  that  the  "  street  would  be  built 
again,  and  the  wall,  even  in  troublous  times."  Of  these  periods  of  seven  weeks,  sixty-two  weeks, 
and  one  week,  the  close  of  the  first  is  distinguished  by  the  completion  of  the  rebuilding  of  the 
city  ;  that  of  the  second  by  the  appearing  of  the  Anointed  One,  or  the  Messiah,  the  Prince ;  that 
of  the  third  by  the  finished  confirmation  of  the  covenant  with  the  many  for  whom  the  saving 
blessings  designated  in  ver.  24,  as  belonging  to  the  end  of  the  whole  period,  are  designed.  The 
last  period  of  one  week  is  again  divided  into  two  halves.  AVhile  the  confirmation  of  the  cove- 
nant extends  through  it,  from  beginning  to  end,  the  cessation  of  the  sacrifice  and  meat-offer- 
ing, and  the  death  of  the  Anointed  One,  on  which  this  depends,  take  place  in  the  middle  of  it, 

(c)  The  Messiah  would  appear  after  the  seven  weeks — reaching  to  the  time  of  completing  the 
rebuilding  of  the  city,  and  the  sixty-two  weeks  following  that — that  i.s,  sixty-nine  weeks  alto- 
gether, would  have  been  finished.  Throughout  half  of  the  other  week,  after  his  appearing,  hf 
would  labour  to  confirm  the  covenant  with  many,  and  then  die  a  violent  death,  by  which  the 
sacrifices  would  be  made  to  cease,  while  the  confirmation  of  the  covenant  would  continue  even 
after  his  death. 

(d)  A  people  of  a  foreign  prince  would  come  and  destroy  the  city  and  the  sanctuary.  The 
end  of  all  would  be  a  '  flood' — an  overflowing  calamity,  till  the  end  of  the  desolations  should  be 
determined,  vs.  26,  27.  This  fearful  desolation  is  all  that  the  prophet  sees  in  the  end,  except 
that  there  is  an  obscure  intimation  that  there  would  be  a  termination  of  that.  But  the  design 
ef  the  vision  evidently  did  not  reach  thus  far.    It  was  to  show  the  series  of  events  after  the 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    IX. 


359 


rebuilding  of  the  city  and  temple  up  to  the  time  when  the  Messiah  would  come;  when  tha 
great  atonement  would  he  made  for  sin,  and  when  the  oblations  and  sacrifices  of  the  temple 
would  finally  cease:  cease,  in  fact  and  naturally,  for  the  one  great  sacrifice,  superseding  tlicm 
all,  had  been  offered,  and  because  the  people  of  a  foreign  prince  would  come  and  sweep  the 
temple  and  the  altar  away. 

The  design  of  the  whole  annunciation  is,  evidently,  to  produce  consolation  in  the  mind  of  the 
prophet.  lie  was  engaged  in  profound  meditation  on  the  present  state,  and  the  long-continued 
desolations  of  the  city  and  temple.  He  gave  his  mind  to  the  study  of  the  prophecies  to  learn 
whether  these  desolations  were  not  soon  to  end.  lie  ascertained  beyond  a  doubt  that  the  period 
arew  near.  He  devoted  himself  to  earnest  prayer  that  the  desolation  might  not  longer  continue , 
that  God,  provoked  by  the  sins  of  the  nation,  would  no  longer  execute  his  fearful  judgments, 
but  would  graciously  interpose,  and  restore  the  city  and  temple.  lie  confessed  ingenuously  and 
humbly  the  sins  of  his  people;  acknowledged  that  the  judgments  of  God  were  just,  but  plead 
earnestly,  in  view  of  his  former  mercies  to  the  same  people,  that  he  would  now  have  compas- 
sion, and  fulfil  his  promises  that  the  city  and  temple  should  be  restored.  An  answer  is  not 
given  directly,  and  in  the  exact  form  in  which  it  might  have  been  hoped  for,  but  an  answer  is 
given  in  which  it  is  implied  that  these  blessings  so  earnestly  sought  would  be  bestowed,  and  in 
which  it  is  promised  that  there  would  be  far  greater  blessings.  It  is  assumed  in  the  answer 
(ver.  25),  that  the  city  would  be  rebuilt,  and  then  the  mind  is  directed  onward  to  the  assurance 
that  it  would  stand  through  seven  times  .seventy  years — seven  times  as  long  an  it  had  now 
been  desolate,  and  that  then  that  which  had  been  the  object  of  the  desire  of  the  people  of  God 
would  be  accomplished;  that  for  which  the  city  and  temple  had  been  built  would  be  fulfilled — 
the  Messiah  would  come,  the  great  sacrifice  for  sin  would  be  made,  and  all  the  typical  arrange- 
ments of  the  temple  would  come  to  an  end.  Thus,  in  fact,  though  not  in  form,  the  communi- 
cation of  the  angel  was  an  .answer  to  prayer,  and  that  occurred  to  Daniel  which  often  occurs  to 
those  who  pray — that  the  direct  prayer  which  is  offered  receives  a  gracious  answer,  and  that 
there  accompanies  the  answer  numberless  other  mercies  which  are  drawn  along  in  the  train ;  or, 
in  other  words,  that  God  gives  us  many  more  blessings  than  we  ask  of  him. 


1  In  the  first  year  of  *  Darius  the 
son  of  Ahasuerus,  of  the  seed  of  the 


^c.  5.31. 


'  or,  in  which  he. 


Medes,  ^  which  was  made  king  over 
the  realm  of  the  Chaldeans. 

2  In  the  first  year  of  his  reign  I 


1.  In  the  first  year  of  Darius.  See 
Notes  on  ch.  v.  31,  and  Intro,  to  ch.  vi. 
§  2.  The  king  here  referred  to  under  this 
name  was  Cyaxares  II.,  who  lived  be- 
tween Astyages  and  Cyrus,  and  in  whom 
was  the  title  of  king.  He  was  the  imme- 
diate successor  of  Belshazzar,  and  was 
the  predecessor  of  Cyrus,  and  was  the 
first  of  the  foreign  princes  that  reigned 
over  Babylon.  On  the  reasons  why  he 
is  called  in  Daniel  Darius,  and  not  Cy- 
axares, see  the  Intro,  to  ch.  vi.  ^  2.  Of 
course,  as  ho  preceded  Cyrus,  who  gave 
the  order  to  rebuild  the  temple  (Ezra  i.  1), 
this  occurred  before  the  close  of  the  sev- 
enty years  of  the  captivity.  ^  The  son 
of  Ahasuerus.  Or  the  son  of  Astyages. 
See  Intro,  to  ch.  vi.  §  2.  It  was  no  unu- 
sual thing  for  the  kings  of  the  East  to  have 
several  names,  and  one  writer  might  refer 
to  them  under  one  name,  and  another  un- 
der another.  ^  Of  the  seed  of  the  Medes. 
Of  the  race  of  the  Medes.  See  as  above. 
^  Wliich  was  made  king  oi&^  the  realm  of 
the  Chaldeans.  By  conquest.  He  suc- 
ceeded Belshazzar,  and  was  the  immedi- 
ate predecessor  of  Cyrus.  Cyaxares  II. 
ascended  the  throne  of  Media,  according 
to   the   common   chronology,  B.  C.  561.1 


Babylon  was  taken  by  Cyrus,  acting  un- 
der the  authority  of  Cyaxares,  B.  C.  538, 
and,  of  course,  the  reign  of  Cyaxares,  or 
Darius,  over  Babylon  commenced  at  that 
point,  and  that  would  be  reckoned  as  the 
'first  year'  of  his  reign.  Ho  died  B.  C. 
536,  and  Cyrus  succeeded  him;  and  as  the 
order  to  rebuild  the  temple  was  in  the 
first  year  of  Cyrus,  the  time  referred  to 
in  this  chapter,  when  Daniel  represents 
himself  as  meditating  on  the  close  of  the 
captivity,  and  offering  this  prayer,  can- 
not long  have  preceded  that  order.  He 
had  ascertained  that  the  period  of  the 
captivity  was  near  its  close,  and  he  na- 
turally inquired  in  what  way  the  restora- 
tion of  the  Jews  to  their  own  land  was 
to  be  effected,  and  by  what  means  the 
temple  was  to  be  rebuilt. 

2.  /  Daniel  understood  hy  looks.  By 
the  sacred  books,  and  especially  by  the 
writings  of  Jeremiah.  It  has  been  made 
a  ground  of  objection  to  the  genuineness 
of  Daniel  that  he  mentions  '  books'  in  this 
place — u''")d'd — as  if  there  were  at  that 
time  a  collection  of  the  sacred  books,  or 
as  if  they  had  been  enrolled  together  in  a 
volume.  The  objection  is,  that  the  writer 
speaks  as  if  the  canon  of  the  Scriptures 


360 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538 


Daniel  understood  by  books  the  num- 
ber of  the  years,  whereof  the  word 
of  the  Lord  came  to  Jeremiah  ^  the 
prophet,  that  he  would  accomplish 

»Je.  25. 11, 12. 

was  completed,  or  that  he  uses  such 
language  as  the  Hebrews  did  when  the 
canon  of  the  Scriptures  was  finished, 
and  thus  betrays  himself.  See  Bertholdt, 
Comm.  p.  78.  Comp.  De  Wette,  Einl. 
§  13.  This  objection  has  been  examined 
by  Hengstenberg,  Beitrag.  pp.  32 — 35. 
It  is  suflBcient  to  reply  to  it,  that  there  is 
every  probability  that  the  Jews  in  Baby- 
lon would  be  in  possession  of  the  sacred 
books  of  their  nation,  and  that,  though 
the  canon  of  the  Scriptures  was  not  yet 
completed,  there  would  exist  private  col- 
lections of  those  writings.  The  word  here 
used  by  Daniel  is  just  such  as  he  would 
employ  on  the  supposition  that  he  referred 
to  a  private  collection  of  the  writings 
of  the  prophets.  Comp.  Lengerke,  in 
loc.  See  the  Intro.,  where  the  objection 
is  examined.  ^  The  number  of  the  years 
xchereof  the  word  of  the  Lord  came  to 
Jeremiah.  The  number  of  the  years  in 
respect  to  which  the  word  of  the  Lord 
came  to  Jeremiah  ;  that  is,  which  he  had 
revealed  to  Jeremiah.  The  hooks  referred 
to,  therefore,  were  evidently  a  collection  of 
the  writings  of  Jeremiah,  or  a  collection 
which  embraced  his  writings.  ^  That  he 
woxdd  accomplish  seventij  years  in  the  de- 
solations of  Jerttsalem.  That  Jerusalem 
would  so  long  lie  waste.  This  was  ex- 
pressly declared  by  Jeremiah  (ch.  xxv. 
11,  12) :  "  And  the  whole  land  shall  be  a 
desolation  and  an  astonishment;  and 
these  nations  shall  serve  the  king  of  Ba- 
bylon seventy  years.  And  it  shall  come 
to  pass,  when  seventy  years  are  accom- 
plished, that  I  will  punish  the  king  of 
Babylon,  and  that  nation,  saith  the  Lord, 
for  their  iniquity,"  <to.  So  also  Jer. 
xxix.  10  :  "  For  thus  saith  the  Lord,  That 
after  seventy  years  bo  accomplished  at 
Babj'lon,  I  will  visit  }'ou,  and  perform 
mj-  good  word  toward  j-ou,  in  causing  you 
to  return  to  this  place."  The  time  of  the 
desolation  and  of  the  captivity,  therefore, 
was  fixed  and  positive,  and  the  only  dif- 
ficulty in  determining  when  it  would 
close,  was  in  ascertaining  the  exact  j'ear 
when  it  commenced.  There  were  several 
occurrences  which  might,  perhaps,  be  re- 
garded as  the  beginning  of  the  desola-, 


seventy  years  in  the  desolations  of 
Jerusalem. 

3  1[  And  ^  I  set  my  face  unto  the 
Lord  God,  to  seek  by  prayer  and 

b  Ne.  1.  4,  kc. ;  Je.  29. 10—13. 


tions  and  the  captivity — the  terminus  a 
quo — and  according  as  one  or  another  of 
them  was  fixed  on  the  close  would  be  re- 
garded as  nearer  or  more  remote.  Daniel, 
it  seems,  by  close  study,  had  satisfied  his 
own  mind  on  that  subject,  and  had  been 
able  to  fix  upon  some  period  that  was 
undoubtedly  the  proper  beginning,  and 
hence  the  time  when  it  would  close. 
The  result  showed  that  his  calculation 
was  correct,  for  at  the  time  he  expected, 
the  order  was  given  by  Cyrus  to  rebuild 
the  city  and  temple.  When  he  instituted 
this  inquiry,  and  engaged  in  this  solemn 
act  of  praj'er,  it  would  have  been  impos- 
sible to  have  conjectured  in  what  way 
this  could  be  brought  about.  The  reign- 
ing monarch  was  Cyaxarcs  II.,  or,  as  he 
is  here  called,  Darius,  and  there  was 
nothing  in  his  character,  or  in  anything 
that  he  had  done,  that  could  have  been  a 
basis  of  calculation  that  he  would  favour 
the  return  of  the  Jews,  and  the  rebuild- 
ing of  the  city,  and  there  was  then  no 
probability  that  Cyrus  would  so  soon 
come  to  the  throne,  and  nothing  in  hig 
character,  as  known,  that  could  be  a 
ground  of  hope  that  he  would  voluntarily 
interpose,  and  accomplish  the  divine  pur- 
poses and  promises  in  regard  to  the  holy 
city.  It  was  probably  such  circumstances 
as  these  which  produced  the  anxiety  in 
the  mind  of  Daniel,  and  which  led  him  to 
ofi'er  this  fervent  praj'er  ;  and  his  fervent 
supplications  should  lead  us  to  trust  in 
God  that  he  will  accomplish  his  purposes, 
and  should  induce  us  to  pray  with  fer- 
vour and  with  faith  when  we  see  no  way 
in  which  he  will  do  it.  In  all  cases  he 
can  as  easily  devise  a  way  in  answer  to 
prayer,  as  ho  could  remove  Cyaxares  from 
the  throne,  and  incline  the  heart  of  Cy- 
rus to  undertake  the  rebuilding  of  Jeru- 
salem and  the  temple. 

3.  And  I  set  my  face  unto  the  Lord  God. 
Probably  the  meaning  is,  that  he  turned 
his  face  toward  Jerusalem,  the  place 
where  God  had  dwelt;  the  place  of  his  holy 
abode  on  earth.  See  Notes  on  eh.  vi.  10. 
The  language,  however,  would  not  be  in- 
appropriate to  denote  prayer  without  such 
a  supposition.    We  turn  to  one  whom  w* 


B,C.538.J  CHAPTER  IX.  361 

8upplications,vritb  fasting,  and  sack- [      4  And  I  prayed  unto  the    Lord 
cloth,  and  ashes.  j  my  God,  and  made  my  confession, 

address,  and  so  prayer  may  be  described 
by  'setting  the  face  toward  God.'  The 
essential  idea  here  is,  that  he  engaged  in 
a  set  and  formal  prayer ;  he  engaged  in 
earnest  devotion,  lie  evidently  set  apart 
a  time  for  this,  for  he  prepared  himself 
by  fasting,  and  by  putting  on  sackcloth 
•Jid  ashes.  ^  To  seek  by  prat/cr  and  su])- 
plicaiioii.  To  seek  his  favour;  to  pray 
that  ae  wou'.d  accomplish  his  purposes. 
The  VTords  'prayer  and  supplication,' 
which  are  often  found  united,  would 
seem  \0  denote  earnest  prayer,  or  prayer 
when  vierci/  was  implored — the  notion 
of  merei/  or  favour  implored  entering 
into  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word 
rendered  supjilication.  *^\  With  fast- 
ing.  In  view  of  the  desolations  of 
the  city  and  temple ;  the  calamities 
that  had  come  upon  the  people;  their 
sins,  &c. ;  and  in  order  also  that  the 
mind  might  be  prepared  for  earnest  and 
fervent  prayer.  The  occasion  was  one 
of  great  importance,  and  it  was  proper 
that  the  mind  should  be  prepared  for  it 
by  fasting.  It  was  the  purpose  of  Dan- 
iel to  humble  himself  before  God,  and  to 
recall  the  sins  of  the  nation  for  which 
they  now  suffered,  and  fasting  was  an 
appropriate  means  of  doing  that.  ^  And 
sackcloth.  Sackcloth  was  a  coarse  kind 
of  cloth,  usually  made  of  hair,  and  em- 
ployed for  the  purpose  of  making  sacks, 
bags,  <te.  As  it  was  dark,  and  coarse, 
and  rough,  it  was  regarded  as  a  proper 
badge  of  mourning  and  humiliation,  and 
was  worn  as  such  usually  by  passing  or 
girding  it  around  the  loins.  See  Notes 
on  Isa.  iii.  24  ;  Job  xvi.  15.  •[  And  asJies. 
It  was  customary  to  cast  ashes  on  the 
head  in  a  time  of  great  grief  and  sorrow. 
The  principles  on  which  this  was  done 
seem  to  have  been,  (a)  that  the  external 
appearance  should  correspond  with  the 
state  of  the  mind  and  the  heart,  and 
(h)  that  such  external  circumstances 
would  have  a  tendency  to  produce  a  state 
of  heart  corresponding  to  them — or  would 
produce  true  humiliation  and  repentance 
for  sin.  Conip.  Notes  on  Job  ii.  8.  The 
practical  truth  taught  in  this  verse,  in 
connection  with  the  preceding  is,  that  the 
fact  that  a  thing  is  certainlj^  predicted, 
till  that  God  means  to  accomplish  it,  is 
an  encouragement  to  prayer,  and  will 
lead  to  prayer.     We  could  have  no  en- 


31 


couragement  to  pray  except  in  the  pur- 
poses and  promises  of  God,  for  we  have  no 
power  ourselves  to  accomplish  the  things 
for  which  we  pray,  and  all  must  depend 
on  his  will.     AVhen  that  will  is  known  it 
is  the  very  thing  to  encourage  us  in  our 
approaches  to  him,  and  is  all  the  assur- 
ance that  we  need  to  induce  us  to  pray. 
4  And  I jirayed  unto  the  Lord  my  God, 
Evidently  a  set  and  formal  prayer.     It 
would  seem  probable  that  ho  offered  this 
prayer,  and  then  recorded  the  substance  of 
it  afterwards.    We  have  no  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  we  have  the  whole  of  it,  but  we 
have  doubtless  its  principal  topics.    ^  And 
made  my  confessioti.     Not  as  an  individ- 
ual, or  not  of  his  own  sins  only,  but  a  con- 
fession in  behalf  of  the  people,  and  in  their 
name.     There  is   no   reason   to  suppose 
that  what  he  here  says  did  not  express 
their  feelings.     They  had  been   long  in 
captivity — lar  away  from  their  desolate 
city  and  temple.     They  could  not  but  be 
sensible  that  these  calamities  had  como 
upon  them  on  account  of  their  sins;  and 
they  could  not  but  feel  that  the  calamities 
I  could  not  be  expected  to  bo  removed  but 
by  confession  of  their   sins,    and  by  ac- 
knowledging the  justice   of  the    divine 
dealings  towards  them.     When  we  have 
i  been  afflicted — when  we  are  called  to  pass 
!  through  severe    trials — and  when  borne 
[  down  by  trial,  we  go   to   God,  and   pray 
that  the    evil  may  be  removed,  the  first 
I  thing  that  is  demanded  is,  that  we  should 
confess  our  sins  and  acknowledge  the  jus- 
j  tice  of  God  in  the  judgments  that  have 
I  come  upon  us.     If  wo  attempt  to  vindi- 
1  cato  and  justify  ourselves,  we  can  have 
I  no  hope  that  the  judgment  will  be  averted. 
Daniel,  therefore,  in  the  name  of  the  peo- 
ple, began   his  pirayer  with  the   humble 
and   penitent   acknowledgment   that   all 
I  that   they   had    suffered   was    deserved. 
I  \  0  Lord,  the  great  and  dreadful  God.    A 
God  great,  and  to  be  feared  or  venerated. — 
N7\i3n-      This  does  not  mean  dreadfulin 
the  sense  that  there  is  anything  stern  or 
!  unamiable  in  his  character,  but  mainly 
!  that  he  is  to  be  regarded  with  veneration. 
^  Keeping  the  covenant  and  mercy.     Keep- 
ing his    covenant   and    showing   mercy. 
This  is  often  ascribed  to   God,  that  he  is 
faithful  to  his  covenant;   that  is,  that  he 
;  is  faithful  to  his  promises  to  his  people,  or 
!  to  those  who  sustain  a  certain  relation  to 


362 


DANIEL. 


[B.  0.  53a 


and  said,  0  Lord,  the  » great  and 
dreadful  God,  keeping  ''the  covenant 
and  mercy  to  them  that  love  him, 
and  to  them  that  keep  his  command- 
ments ; 

5  We  « have  sinned  and  have  com- 
mitted iniquity,  and  have  done  wick- 
edly, and  have  rebelled,  even  by  de- 

»Ne.  9.  32,  &c.         bEx.  20.  6. 
'Ps.  106.6;  Is.  64.  6,7. 

him,  and  vfhOjjiTe  faithful  to  their  cove- 
nant vows.  IT  there  is  alienation  and  es- 
trangement, and  want  of  faithfulness  on 
either  side,  it  does  not  begin  with  him. 
He  is  faithful  to  all  his  promises,  and  his 
fidelity  may  always  be  assumed  as  a  basis 
of  calualation  in  all  our  intercourse  with 
him.  See  the  word  covenant  in  Cruden's 
Concordance.  The  word  mercy  seems  to 
be  added  here  to  denote  that  mercy  enters 
into  his  dealings  with  us  even  in  keeping 
the  covenant.  We  are  so  sinful,  and  so 
unfaithful  ourselves,  that  if  he  is  faithful 
to  his  covenant,  it  must  bo  by  showing 
mercy  to  us.  ^  To  them  that  love  him,  &c. 
The  conditions  of  the  covenant  extend  no 
farther  than  this,  since,  in  a  compact  of 
any  kind,  one  is  bound  to  be  faithful  only 
•while  the  terms  are  maintained  by  the 
other  party.  So  God  binds  himself  to 
show  favour  only  while  we  are  obedient, 
and  we  can  plead  his  covenant  only  when 
we  are  obedient,  when  we  confess  our 
sins,  and  plead  his  promises  in  this  sense 
— that  he  has  assured  us  that  he  will  re- 
store and  receive  us  if  we  are  penitent. 
It  was  this  which  Daniel  jilead  on  this 
occasion.  He  could  not  plead  that  his 
people  had  been  obedient,  and  had  thus 
any  claims  to  the  divine  favour,  but  he 
could  cast  himself  and  them  on  the  mercy 
of  a  covenant-keeping  God,  who  would 
remember  his  covenant  with  them  if  they 
were  penitent,  and  who  would  graciously 
pardon. 

5.  ^Ye  have  sinned.  Though  Daniel 
was  alone,  he  spake  in  the  name  of  the 
people  in  general — doubtless  recounting 
the  long  series  of  crimes  in  the  nation 
which  had  preceded  the  captivity,  and 
which  were  the  cause  of  the  ruin  of 
the  city  and  temple.  ^  And  have  com- 
mitted iniquity,  &c.  These  varied  forms 
of  expression  are  designed  to  give  in- 
tentity  to  what  he  says.  It  is  equiva- 
knt  to  saying  that  they  had  sinned  in 


parting  from  thy  precepts  and  from 
thy  judgments : 

6  Neither  ^have  we  hearkened 
unto  thy  servants  the  prophets, 
which  spake  in  thy  name  to  our 
kings,  our  princes,  and  our  fathers, 
and  to  all  the  people  of  the  land. 

7  0  Lord,  righteousness  =  belong' 
eth  unto  f  thee,  but  unto  us  confusion 

d  2  Ch.  36. 15,  16.  "  or,  thou  hast,    f  Ps.  51.  4. 


every  way  possible.  The  mind,  in  a  state 
of  true  repentance,  dwells  on  its  sins,  and 
recounts  the  various  forms  in  which  ini- 
quity has  been  done,  and  multiplies  ex- 
pressions of  regret  and  sorrow  on  account 
of  transgression.  ^  From  thy  precepts. 
Thy  commands;  thy  laws.  ^  Thy  judg- 
ments. Thy  laws — the  word  judf/ments 
in  the  Scripture  denoting  what  God  judges 
to  be  right  for  us  to  do,  as  well  as  what  it 
is  right  for  him  to  inflict. 

6.  Neither  have  we  hearkened  unto  th^ 
servants  the  prophets.  Who  called  upon 
us  to  turn  from  our  sins ;  who  made  known 
the  will  of  God,  and  who  proclaimed  that 
these  judgments  would  come  upon  us  if 
we  did  not  repent.  ^  Which  spiahe  in 
thy  name  to  our  kings,  &c.  To  all  classes 
of  the  people,  calling  on  kings  and  rulers 
to  turn  from  their  idolatry,  and  the  peo- 
ple to  forsake  their  sins,  and  to  seek  the 
Lord.  It  was  a  characteristic  of  the 
prophets  that  they  spared  no  classes  of  the 
nation,  but  faithfully  uttered  all  ths  word 
of  God.  Their  admonitions  had  been  un- 
heeded, and  the  people  now  saw  clearly  that 
these  calamities  had  come  upon  them  be- 
cause they  had  not  hearkened  to  their  voice. 

7.  0  Lord,  righteousnesshelongeth  vnto 
thee.  Marg.,  '  or,  thou  hast.'  The  He- 
brew is,  '  to  thee  is  righteousness,  to  us 
shame,'  &c.  The  state  of  mind  in  him 
who  makes  the  prayer  is  that  of  ascribing 
righteousness  or  justice  to  God.  Daniel 
feels  and  admits  that  God  has  been  right 
in  his  dealings.  He  is  not  disposed  to 
blame  him,  but  to  take  all  the  shame  and 
blame  to  the  people.  There  is  no  mur- 
muring or  complaining  on  his  part  as  if 
God  had  done  wrong  in  any  way,  but  there 
is  the  utmost  confidence  in  him,  and  in  his 
government.  This  is  the  true  feeling  with 
which  to  come  before  God  when  we  are 
afflicted,  and  when  we  pleadfor  his  mercy 
and  favour.  God  should  be  regarded  as 
righteous  in  all  that  be  has  done^  and 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER   IX. 


3G3 


of  faces,  as  at  this  day ;  to  the  men 
of  Judah,  and  to  the  inhabitants  of 
Jerusalem,  and  unto  all  Israel,  that 
are  near,  and  ikat  are  far  oflF,  through 
all  the  countries  whither  ^thou  hast 
driven  them,  because  of  their  tres- 
pass that  they  have  trespassed 
against  thee. 

holy  in  all  his  judgments  and  claims,  and 
there  should  be  a  willingness  to  address 
him  as  holy,  and  just,  and  true,  and  to 
take  shame  and  confusion  of  face  to  our- 
selves. Comp.  Ps.  li.  4.  ^  But  unto  us 
confusion  of  faces.  Heb.,  *  shame  of 
faces ;'  that  is,  that  kind  of  shame  which 
we  have  when  we  feel  that  we  are  guilty, 
and  which  commonly  shows  itself  in  the 
countenance.  ^  As  at  this  day.  As  we 
actually  are  at  this  time.  That  is,  he  felt 
that  at  that  time  they  were  a  down-trod- 
den, an  humbled,  a  contemned  people. 
Their  country  was  in  ruins  ;  they  were 
captives  in  a  far-distant  land,  and  all  on  • 
which  they  had  prided  themselves  was 
laid  waste.  All  these  judgments  and  hu- 
miliating things  he  says  they  had  de-  j 
served,  for  they  had  grievously  sinned 
against  God.  ^  To  the  men  of  Judah. 
Not  merely  to  the  tribe  of  Judah,  but  to 
the  kingdom  of  that  name.  After  the  re- 
volt of  the  ten  tribes — which  became 
known  as  the  kingdom  of  Ephraira — be- 
cause Ephraim  was  the  largest  tribe,  or 
the  kingdom  of  Israel,  the  other  portion 
of  the  people — the  tribes  of  Judah  and 
Benjamin,  were  known  as  the  kingdom 
of  Judah,  since  Judah  was  by  far  the 
large-st  tribe  of  the  two.  This  kingdom 
is  referred  to  here,  because  Daniel  be- 
longed to  it,  and  because  the  ten  tribes 
had  been  carried  away  long  before,  and 
scattered  in  the  countries  of  the  East. 
The  ten  tribes  had  been  carried  to  As- 
syria. Jerusalem  always  remained  as 
the  capitol  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  and 
it  is  to  this  portion  of  the  Hebrew  people 
that  the  prayer  of  Daniel  more  especially 
appertains.  ^  And  to  the  inhabitants  of 
Jerusalem.  Particularly  to  them,  as  the 
heaviest  calamities  had  come  upon  them, 
and  as  they  had  been  prominent  in  the 
Bins  for  which  these  judgments  had  come 
upon  the  people.  ^  And  unto  all  Israel. 
All  the  people  who  are  descendants  of  Is- 
rael or  Jacob,  wherever  they  may  be,  em- 
bracing not  onlr  those  of  the  kingdom  of  I 


8  0  Lord,  to  us  oelongeth  b  confu- 
sion of  face,  to  our  kings,  to  our 
princes,  and  to  our  fathers,  because 
wo  have  sinned  against  thee. 

9  To  the  Lord  our  God  '^belong 
mercies  and  forgiveness,  though  we 
have  rebelled  against  him  ; 

a  Le.  26.  33,  34.    b  Eze.  16.  C3.    c  Ps.  130,  4, 7. 


Judah  properly  so  called,  but  all  who  ap- 
pertain to  the  nation.     They  were  all  of 
one   blood.      They  had   had    a  common 
country.     They  had  all  revolted,  and  a 
succession  of  heavy  judgments  had  como 
upon  the  nation  as  such,  and  all  had  oc- 
casion for  shame  and  confusion  of  face. 
^  That  are   near,   and  that  are  far  off. 
Whether  in  Babylon,  in  Assyria,  or  in 
more  remote  countries.     The  ten   tribes 
I  had  been  carried  away  some  two  hundred 
I  years  before  this  prayer  was  offered  by 
'  Daniel,  and  they  were   scattered  in  far 
!  distant  lands.     *^  Thronc/h   all  the  coun- 
:  tries  whither  thou  hast   driven   them,  &c. 
In  Babj'lonia,  iu  Assyria,  in  Egypt,  or  in 
other  lands.    They  were  scattered  every- 
where, and  wherever  they  were  they  had 
common  cause  for  humiliation  and  shame. 

8.  0  Lord,  to  us  belongeth  co)(/u8ioji, 
&c.  To  all  of  us  ,•  to  the  whole  people, 
high  and  low,  rich  and  poor,  the  rulers 
and  the  ruled.  All  had  been  partakers  of 
the  guilt ;  all  were  involved  in  the  ca- 
lamities consequent  on  the  guilt.  As  all 
had  sinned,  the  judgments  had  como 
upon  all,  and  it  was  proper  that  the  con- 
fession should  be  made  in  the  name  of  all. 

9.  To  the  Lord  our  God  belong  mercies 
and  forgivenesses.  Not  only  does  right- 
eousness belong  to  him  in  the  sense  that 
he  has  done  right,  and  that  ho  cannot  bo 
blamed  for  what  he  has  done,  but  mercy 
and  forgiveness  belong  to  him  in  the  sense 
that  he  only  can  pardon,  and  that  theso 
are  attributes  of  his  nature.  %  Though 
we  have  rebelled  against  him.  The  word 
here  used  and  rendered  though — ■^3 — may 
mean  either  though,  or  for.  That  is,  the 
passage  may  mean  that  mercy  belongs  to 
God,  and  we  may  hope  that  he  will  show 
it,  although  we  have  been  so  eYil  and  re- 
bellious ;  or  it  may  mean  that  it  belongs 
to  him,  and  he  only  can  show  it,  for  we  have 
rebelled  against  him;  that  is,  our  only 
hope  now  is  in  his  mercy, /or  we  have  sin- 
ned,  and  forfeited  all  claims  to  his  favour. 
Either  of  these  interpretations  make  good 


364 


DANIEL. 


LB.  C.  538. 


10  Neither  have  we  obeyed  the 
voice  of  the  Lord  our  God,  to  walk 
in  his  laws,  which  he  set  before  us 
by  his  servants  the  prophets. 

11  Yea,  all  » Israel  have  trans- 
gressed thy  law,  even  by  departing, 
that  they  might  not  obey  thy  voice  ; 
therefore  the  curse  is  poured  upon 
us,  and  the  oath  that  is  written  in 
the  law  of  Moses  the  servant  of  God, 
because  we  have  sinned  against  him. 

=■  Is.  1.  4—6. 

sense,  but  the  latter  would  seem  to  be 
most  in  accordance  with  the  general  strain 
of  this  part  of  the  pra3'er,  which  is  to  make 
humble  and  penitent  confession.  So  the 
Latin  Vulgate — quia.  So  Theodotion,  on. 
So  Luther  and  Lengerke,  denn.  In  the 
eamo  way,  the  passage  in  Ps.  xxr.  11, 
is  rendered,  "For  thy  name's  sake,  0  Lord, 
pardon  mine  iniquity,  for —  O  — it  is 
great," — though  this  passage  will  admit 
«f  the  other  interpretation,  '  althoitgh  it 
\s  great.' 

10.  Neither  have  xoe  obeyed  the  voice  of 
(he  L  Old.  The  commands  of  God  as  made 
tnown  by  the  prophets,  ver.  6. 

11.  Yea,  all  Israel  have  transgressed,  &C. 
Embracing  not  only  the  tribe  and  the 
kingdom  of  Judah,  but  the  whole  nation. 
The  calamity,  therefore,  had  come  upon 
them  all.  ^Evenly  dejmrting.  By  de- 
parting from  thy  commandments;  or  by 
rebellion  against  thee.  ^  That  they  might 
not  obey  thy  voice.  By  refusing  to  obey 
thy  voice,  or  thy  commands.  5f  There/ore 
the  curse  is  poured  upon  «s.  As  rain  de- 
scends, or  as  water  is  poured  out.  The 
curse  here  refers  to  that  which  was  so  sol- 
emnly threatened  by  Moses  in  case  the 
nation  did  not  obey  God.  See  Deut. 
xxviii.  15-68.  ^  And  the  oath  that  is 
written  in  the  laiv  of  Mosc^.  &c.  The 
word  here  rendered  oaf  A — n;-3L" — means 
properly  a  sicearing,  or  an  oath,  and  hence, 
either  an  oath  of  promise  or  in  a  covenant, 
or  an  oath  of  cursing  or  imprecation ; 
that  is,  a  curse.  It  is  evidently  used  in 
the  latter  sense  here.  See  Geseiiius,  Zfx. 
Daniel  saw  clearly  that  the  evils  which 
had  been  threatened  by  Moses  (Deut. 
xxviii.),  bad  actually  come  upon  the  na- 
tion, and  he  as  clearly  saw  that  the  cause 
»f  all  these  calamities  was  that  which 
Moges  had  specified.    He,  therefore,  frank- 


12  And  he  hath  confirmed  bin 
words,  which  he  spake  against  us, 
and  against  our  judges  that  judged 
us,  by  bringing  upon  us  a  great  evil : 
for  under  the  whole  heaven  hath  not 
been  done  as  hath  been  done  upon 
Jerusalem. 

13  As  it  is  written  »>  in  the  law 
of  Moses,  all  this  evil  is  come  upon 
us :  yet  <=  made  we  not  our  prayer 

b  Le.  26.  U,  &c.;  De.  28. 15,  A-c;  La.  2.  15—17. 
"^  entreated  we  not  the  face  of. 


ly  and  penitently  confessed  these  sins  in 
the  name  of  the  whole  people,  and  earn- 
estly supplicated  for  mercy. 

12.  And  he  hath,  confirmed  his  words, 
&c.  By  bringing  upon  the  people  all  that 
he  had  threatened  in  case  of  their  disobe- 
dience. Daniel  saw  that  there  was  a  com- 
plete fulfilment  of  all  that  he  had  said 
would  come  upon  them.  As  all  this  had 
been  threatened,  he  could  not  complain  ; 
and  as  he  had  confirmed  his  words  in  re- 
gard to  the  threatening,  he  had  the  same 
reason  to  think  that  he  would  in  regard 
to  his  promises.  What  Daniel  here  says 
was  true  in  his  time,  and  in  reference  to 
his  people  will  be  found  to  be  true  at  all 
times,  and  in  reference  to  all  people. — 
Nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  God 
will  'confirm'  all  the  words  that  he  has 
ever  spoken,  and  that  no  sinner  can  hope 
to  escape  on  the  ground  that  God  will  be 
found  to  be  false  to  his  threatenings,  or 
that  he  has  forgotten  them,  or  that  he 
is  indifferent  to  them.  ^  Against  our 
judges  that  judged  us.  Our  magistrates  or 
rulers.  ^  For  binder  the  u-hole  heaven. — 
In  all  the  world.  ^\  Hath  not  been  done  aa 
hath  been  done  xq)on  Jertisalem.  In  respect 
to  the  slaughter,  and  the  captivity,  and 
the  complete  desolation.  No  one  can  show 
that  at  that  time  this  was  not  literally 
true.  The  city  was  in  a  state  of  complete 
desolation  ;  its  temple  was  in  ruins ;  its 
people  had  been  slain  or  borne  into  cap- 
tivity. 

13.  As  it  is  icritten  in  the  law  of  Moses. 
The  word  law  was  given  to  all  the  writ- 
ings of  Moses.  See  Notes  on  Luke  xxiv. 
44.  ^  Yet  made  %ce  not  onr  prayer  before 
the  Lord  our  God.  Marg.,  entreated  ue 
not  the  face  of.  The  Hebrew  word  here 
used—  r\^r\  — means  properly  to  be  pol- 
ished; then  to  be  •worn  down  in  strength, 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    IX, 


565 


before  the  Lord  our  God,  that  tvo 
might  turn  from  our  iniquities,  and 
understand  tliy  truth. 

14  Therefore  hath  the  Lord 
watched  upon  the  evil,  and  brought 
it  upon  us  :  for  the  Lord  our  God 
is  righteous  ■''  in  all  his  works  which 


to  be  weak  ;  then  to  be  sick,  or  diseased  ; 
then  in  Piel,  (the  form  used  here)  to  rub 
or  stroke  the  face  of  any  one,  to  soothe  or 
caress,  and  hence  to  beseech,  or  suppli- 
cate. See  Gesenius, /)  cj:-.  Hero  it  means, 
that,  as  a  people,  they  had  failed,  when 
they  had  sinned,  to  call  upon  God  for 
pardon;  to  jonfess  their  sins;  to  implore 
his  mercy ;  to  deprecate  his  wrath. 
It  would  have  been  easy  to  turn  aside 
his  threatened  judgments  if  they  had 
been  penitent,  and  had  sought  his  mercy, 
but  they  had  not  done  it.  What  is 
here  said  of  them,  can  and  will  be  said  of 
all  sinners  when  the  divine  judgment 
comes  upon  them.  ^  That  we  vii(jht  turn 
from  our  ijiiqiitties.  That  we  might  seek 
grace  to  turn  from  our  transgressions. 
^  And  understand  thy  truth.  The  truth 
which  God  had  revealed;  equivalent  to 
saying  that  they  might  be  righteous. 

14.  Therefore  hath  the  Lord  icutched 
upon  the  evil.  The  word  here  used,  and 
rendered  i»a<cAccZ — nf^U' — means  properly 
to  icalce ;  to  be  sleepless;  to  xcatch.  Then 
it  means  to  watch  over  anything,  or  to 
be  attentive  to  it,  Jer.  i.  12  ;  xx;si.  28  ; 
xliv.  27.  Gesenius,  Lex.  The  meaning 
here  is,  that  the  Lord  had  not  been  inat- 
tentive to  the  progress  of  things,  nor  un- 
mindful of  his  threatening.  He  had 
never  slumbered,  but  had  carefully  ob- 
served the  course  of  events,  and  had  been 
attentive  to  all  that  they  had  done,  and 
to  all  that  he  had  threatened  to  do.  The 
practical  truth  taught  here — and  it  is  one 
of  great  importance  to  sinners — is  that 
God  is  not  inattentive  to  their  conduct, 
though  he  may  seem  to  be,  and  that  in 
due  time  he  will  show  that  he  has  kept  an 
unslumbering  eye  upon  them.  See  Notes 
on  Isa.  xviii.  4.  *^For  the  Lord  our  God 
is  righteous  in  all  his  icorks,  &c.  J.'ns  is 
the  language  of  a  true  penitent ;  language 
which  is  always  used  by  one  who  has 
right  feelings  when  he  reflects  on  the 
divine  dealings  towards  him.  God  is  seen 
to  be  righteous  in  his  law  and  in  his 
dealings,  and  the  only  reason  why  we  suf-j 
31* 


he_  doeth ;  for  we  obeyed  not  hia 
voice. 

15  And  now,  0  Lord  our  God, 

that  hast  brought  thy  people  forth 

out   of  the   land  of  Egypt  with  a 

mighty  hand,  and  hast  ''gotten  theo 

a  Ne.  9.  33.  b  made  thee  a  name. 

fer  is  that  we  have  sinned.  This  will  be 
found  to  be  true  always,  and  whatever 
calamities  we  suffer,  it  should  be  a  fixed 
principle  with  us  to  ''ascribe  righteous- 
ness to  our  Maker."    Job  xxxvi.  3. 

15.  Andnoiv,  0  Lord  our  God,  that  hast 
brought  thy  people  forth  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt.  In  former  days.  The  reference 
to  this  shows  that  it  is  proper  to  use  argu- 
ments before  God  when  we  plead  with 
him  (Comp.  Notes  on  Job  xxiii.  4) ;  that 
is,  to  suggest  considerations  or  reasons 
why  the  prayer  should  be  granted.  Those 
reasons  must  be,  of  course,  such  as  will 
occur  to  our  own  minds  as  sufficient  to 
make  it  proper  for  God  to  bestow  the 
blessing,  and,  when  they  are  presented 
before  him,  it  must  be  with  submission  to 
his  higher  view  of  the  subject.  The  argu- 
ments which  it  is  proper  to  urge  are  those 
derived  from  the  divine  mercy  and  faith- 
fulness; from  the  promises  of  God;  from 
his  former  dealings  with  his  people;  from 
our  sins  and  misery;  from  the  great 
sacrifice  made  for  sin;  from  the  desira- 
bleness that  his  name  should  be  glorified. 
Here  Daniel  properly  refers  to  the  former 
divine  interposition  in  favour  of  the  He- 
brew people,  and  he  pleads  the  fact  that 
God  had  delivered  them  from  Egypt  as  a 
reason  why  he  should  now  interpose  and 
save  them.  The  strength  of  this  argu- 
ment may  be  supposed  to  consist  in  such 
things  as  tho  following:  (a)  in  the  fact 
that  there  was  as  much  reason  for  in- 
terposing now,  as  there  was  then ; 
(6)  in  the  fact  that  his  interposing  then 
might  be  considered  as  a  proof  that  ha 
intended  to  be  regarded  as  their  pro- 
tector, and  to  defend  them  as  his  peo- 
ple ;  (c)  in  tho  fact  that  he  who  had 
evinced  such  mighty  power  at  that 
time,  must  be  able  to  interpose  and  save 
them  now,  <tc.  ^  And  hast  gotten  thai 
renou-n.  Marg.,  made  thee  a  name.  So 
the  Hebrew.  The  idea  is,  that  that  great 
event  had  been  the  means  of  making  him 
known  as  a  faithful  God,  and  a  God 
able  to  deliver.    As  he  was  thus  known. 


3G5 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538, 


renown,  as  at  this  day ;  we  have 
sinned,  we  have  done  wickedly. 

10  "il  0  Lord,  according  to  all  thy 
ripjhteousness,  I  beseech  thee,  let 
thine  anger  and  thy  fury  be  turned 
away  from  thy  city  Jerusalem,  thy 
holy  mountain:  because  for  our 
sins,  and  for  the  iniquities  of  our 

Daniel  prayed  that  he  would  again  inter- 
pose, and  -n-oukl  now  show  that  he 
was  as  able  to  deliver  his  people  as  in 
former  times.  %  As  ot  this  day.  That 
is,  as  God  was  then  regarded.  The  re- 
membrance of  his  interposition  had  been 
diffused  abroad,  and  had  been  transmitted 
from  age  to  age.  ^  We  have  sinned,  &c. 
This  turn  in  the  thought  shows  how 
deeply  the  idea  of  their  sinfulness  pressed 
upon  the  mind  of  Daniel.  The  natural 
and  obvious  course  of  thought  would 
have  been,  that,  as  God  had  interposed, 
when  his  people  were  delivered  from 
Egyptian  bondage,  he  would  now  again 
interpose  ;  but,  instead  of  that,  the  mind 
of  Daniel  is  overwhelmed  with  the  thought 
that  they  had  sinned  grievously  against 
one  who  had  shown  that  he  was  a  God 
60  great  and  glorious,  and  who  had  laid 
them  under  such  obligations  to  love  and 
serve  him. 

16.  0  Lord,  according  to  allthyrighte- 
orisness.  The  word  righteousness  here 
seems  to  refer  to  all  that  was  excellent 
and  glorious  in  the  character  of  God. 
The  eye  of  Daniel  is  fixed  upon  what  he 
had  formerly  done ;  upon  his  character 
of  justice,  and  mercy,  .and  goodness ; 
upon  the  faithfulness  of  God  to  his  peo- 
ple, and,  in  view  of  all  that  was  excellent 
and  lovely  in  his  character,  he  plead  that 
he  would  interpose  and  turn  away  his 
anger  from  his  people  now.  It  is  the 
character  of  God  that  is  the  ground  of 
his  plea — and  what  else  is  there  that  can 
give  us  encouragement  when  we  come 
before  him  in  prayer?  ^  Let  thine  anger 
and  thy  fury  be  turned  away,  &c.  The 
anger  which  had  come  upon  the  city,  and 
which  appeared  to  rest  upon  it.  Jeru- 
salem was  in  ruins,  and  it  seemed  still  to 
be  lying  under  the  wrath  of  God.  The 
word  rendered  fury,  is  the  common  one 
to  denote  wrath  or  indignation.  It  im- 
plies no  more  than  anger  or  indignation, 
■and  refers  here  to  the  divine  displeasure 
igainst  their  sins,  manifested  in  the  de- 


fathers,  Jerusalem  and  thy  people 
are  become  a  reproach  to  all  that  are 
about  us. 

17  Now  therefore,  0  our  God, 
hear  the  prayer  of  thy  servant,  and 
his  supplications,  and  cause  thy 
face  to  shine  upon  thy  sanctuary 
that  is  desolate  for  the  Lord's  sake. 


struction  of  their  city.  ^  Thy  holy  moun- 
tain. Jerusalem  was  built  on  hills,  and 
the  city  in  general  might  be  designated 
by  this  phrase.  Or,  more  probably,  there 
is  allusion  either  to  Mount  Zion,  or  to 
MountMoriah.  ^l^  Because  for  our  sins,  kc. 
There  is,  on  the  part  of  Daniel,  no  dispo- 
sition to  blame  God  for  what  he  had  done. 
There  is  no  murmuring  or  complaining, 
as  if  be  had  been  unjust  or  severe  in  his 
dealings  with  his  people.  Jerusalem  was 
indeed  in  ruins,  and  the  people  were  cap- 
tives in  a  distant  land,  but  he  felt  and 
admitted  that  God  was  just  in  all  that  he 
had  done.  It  was  too  manifest  to  be  de- 
nied that  all  these  calamities  had  come 
upon  them  on  account  of  their  sins,  and 
this  Daniel,  in  the  name  of  the  people, 
humbly  and  penitently  acknowledged. 
•T  A  reproach  to  all  that  are  about  «s.  All 
the  surrounding  nations.  They  reproach 
us  with  our  sins,  and  with  the  judgments 
that  have  come  upon  us,  as  if  we  were 
peculiarly  wicked,  and  were  forsaken  of 
heaven. 

17.  Noio,  therefore,  0  our  God,  hear 
the  lyrayer  of  thy  servant.  In  behalf  of 
the  people.  He  plead  for  his  people,  and 
country,  and  earnestly  entreated  the 
Lord  to  be  merciful.  His  argument  is 
based  on  the  confession  of  sin;  on  the 
character  of  God ;  on  the  condition  of  the 
city  and  temple ;  on  the  former  di'.'ine 
interpositions  in  behalf  of  the  people; 
and  by  all  these  considerations,  ho  pleads 
with  God  to  have  mercy  upon  his  people 
and  land.  ^  And  cause  thy  face  to  shine 
upon  thy  sanctuary.  Upon  the  temple. 
That  is,  that  he  would  look  upon  it  be- 
nignly and  favourably.  The  language 
is  common  in  the  Scriptures,  when  favour 
and  kindness  are  denoted  by  lifting  up 
the  light  of  the  countenance,  and  by 
similar  phrases.  The  allusion  is,  origi- 
nally, perhaps,  to  the  sun,  which,  when 
it  shines  brightly,  is  an  emblem  of  favour 
and  mercy ;  when  it  is  overclouded,  is  an 
emblem  of  wrath.     ^  For  th«  L  ord'i  take. 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER  IX. 


367 


18  0  my  God,  incline  thine  ear, 
and  hear;  open  thine  eyes,  and  be- 
hold our  desolations,  and  the  city 
^ which  is  called  by  thy  name:  for 
■we  do  not  t present  our  supplications 
before  thee  for  our  righteousnesses, 
but  for  thy  great  mercies. 

'  whereupon  thy  name  is  called  fall. 


That  is,  that  he  would  be  propitious  for 
his  own  sake ;  to  wit,  that  his  glory  might 
be  promoted  ;  that  his  excellent  character 
might  be  displayed ;  that  his  mercy  and 
compassion  might  be  shown.  All  true 
pi-ayer  has  its  seal  in  a  desire  that  the 
glory  of  God  may  be  promoted,  and  the 
excellence  of  his  character  displayed. 
That  is  of  more  consequence  than  our 
welfare,  and  the  gratification  of  oHr  wishes, 
and  that  should  be  uppermost  in  our 
hearts  when  we  approach  the  throne  of 
grace. 

18.  0  my  God,  incline  thine  car  and 
hear.  Pleading  earnestly  for  his  atten- 
tion and  his  favour,  as  one  does  to  a  man. 
^  Open  thine  cijcs.  As  if  his  eyes  had 
been  closed  upon  the  condition  of  the 
city,  and  ho  did  not  see  it.  Of  course, 
all  this  is  figurative,  and  is  the  language 
of  strong  and  earnest  pleading  when  the 
heart  is  greatly  interested.  *^  And  the 
city  which  is  called  hy  thy  name.  Marg., 
whereupon  thy  name  is  called.  The  mar- 
gin expresses  the  sense  more  literally, 
but  the  meaning  is,  that  the  city  had 
been  consecrated  to  God,  and  was  called 
his — the  city  of  Jehovah.  It  was  known 
as  the  place  of  his  sanctuary — the  city 
where  his  worship  was  celebrated,  and 
which  was  regarded  as  his  peculiar  dwell- 
ing-place on  the  earth.  Comp.  Ps.  xlviii. 
1,  2,  3 ;  Ixxxvii.  3.  This  is  a  new  ground 
of  entreaty,  that  the  city  belonged  to 
God,  and  that  he  would  remember  the 
close  connection  between  the  prosperity 
of  that  city  and  the  glory  of  his  own 
name. 

19.  0  Lord,  hear,  &c.  The  language 
in  this  verse  does  not  require  any  parti- 
cular explanation.  The  repetition — the 
varied  forms  of  expression — indicate  a 
mind  intent  on  the  object ;  a  heart  greatly 
interested ;  an  earnestness  that  cannot 
be  denied.  It  is  language  that  is  re- 
tpectful,  solemn,  devout,  but  deeply 
earnest.  It  is  not  vain  repetition,  for  its 
force  is  not  in  the  words  employed,  but  in 


19  0  Lord,  hear ;  0  Lord,  forgive ; 
0  Loi'd,  hearken  and  do  ;  defer  not, 
for  thine  own  sake,  0  my  God  :  for 
thy  city  and  thy  people  are  called 
by  thy  name. 

20  ^  And  while  I  was  speaking, 
and   praying,    and    confessing   my 

^  cause  to. 

the  manifest  fervour,  earnestness,  and 
sincerity  of  spirit  which  pervade  the 
pleading.  It  is  earnest  intercession  and 
supplication  that  God  would  hear — that 
he  would  forgive,  that  he  would  hearken 
and  do,  that  he  would  not  defer  his  gra- 
cious interposition.  The  sins  of  the  peo- 
ple ;  the  desolation  of  the  city ;  the  pro- 
mises of  God ;  the  reproach  that  the  na- 
tion was  suffering — all  these  come  rushing 
over  the  soul,  and  prompt  to  the  most 
earnest  pleading  that  perhaps  ever  pro- 
ceeded from  human  lips.  And  thesa 
things  justified  that  earnest  pleading — 
for  the  prayer  was  that  of  a  prophet,  a 
man  of  God,  a  man  that  loved  his  country, 
a  man  that  was  intent  on  the  promotion 
of  the  divine  glory  as  the  supreme  object 
of  his  life.  Such  earnest  intercession; 
such  confession  of  sin ;  such  a  dwelling 
on  arguments  why  a  prayer  should  be 
heard,  is  at  all  times  acceptable  to  God; 
and  though  it  cannot  be  supposed  that 
the  divine  mind  needs  to  be  instructed, 
or  that  our  arguments  will  convince  God 
or  influence  him  as  arguments  do  men, 
yet  it  is  undoubtedly  proper  to  urge  them 
as  if  they  would,  for  it  may  be  only  in 
this  way  that  our  own  minds  can  bo 
brought  into  a  proper  state.  The  great 
argument  which  ice  are  to  urge  why  our 
prayers  should  be  heard,  is  the  sacrifice 
which  has  been  made  for  sin  by  the  Re- 
deemer, and  the  fact  that  he  has  pur- 
chased for  us  the  blessings  which  we 
need;  but  in  connection  with  that  it  is 
proper  to  urge  our  own  sins  and  necessi- 
ties ;  the  wants  of  our  friends  or  our 
country ;  our  own  danger  and  that  of 
others;  the  interposition  of  God  in  times 
past  in  behalf  of  his  people,  and  bis  own 
gracious  promises  and  purposes.  If  wo 
have  the  spirit,  the  faith,  the  penitence, 
the  earnestness  of  Daniel,  we  may  be  sure 
that  our  prayers  will  be  heard  as  his 
was. 

20.  And  while  I  was  speaking,  Ac.  Is 
the  very  time  when  I  was  thus  pleading. 


368 


DANIEL, 


\B.  C.  538 


Ein  and  the  sin  of  my  people  Israel, 
and  presenting  my  supplication  be- 
fore the  Lord  my  God  for  the  holy 
mountain  of  my  God  ; 

21  Yea,  while  I  teas  speaking  in 
prayer,  even  the  man  Gabriel,  Avhom 
I  had  seen  in  the  vision  at  the  be- 

*  iinth  weariness,  or,  Jlt'ght. 

^  For  the  holy  mountain  of  my  God.  Notes 
on  ver.  16. 

21.  Yea,  while  I  was  spealcivg  in  prayer. 
How  long  the  prayer  continued,  we  are 
not  informed.  It  is  probable  that  we 
have  only  the  substance  of  it,  and  that 
Daniel  has  recorded  only  the  topics  on 
which  ho  dwelt  more  at  length.  The 
subject  was  of  great  importance,  and  it 
is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  a  day  had 
been  devoted  to  an  examination  of  the 
prophecies,  and  to  solemn  prayer.  ^  Even 
the  man  Gabriel.  AVho  had  the  appear- 
ance of  a  man,  and  hence  so  called. — 
^  Whom  I  had  seen  iti  the  vision  at  the 
beginning.  That  is,  in  a.  former  vision. — 
See  Notes  on  ch.  viii.  16.  It  cannot  refer 
to  what  i,s  mentioned  in  this  (the  ninth) 
chapter,  for  (a)  he  had  as  yet  had  no  vis- 
ion, but  all  that  is  recorded  is  a  praj'er  ; 
(6)  there  is  no  intimation  that  Gabriel  had 
appeared  to  him  at  the  beginning  of  tho 
pr.ayer ;  and  (e)  it  is  declared  that  at  the 
beginning  of  the  prayer,  Gabriel,  then  evi- 
dently in  heaven,  had  received  command- 
ment to  go  to  Daniel,  and  to  communicate 
tho  message  to  him,  ver.  23.  Tho  mean- 
ing undoubtedly  is,  that  tho  personage 
who  now  appeared  to  him  he  recognized 
to  be  tho  same  who  had  appeared  in  a 
former  vision  on  the  banks  of  the  Ulai. 
The  proper  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  here 
is,  '  in  a  vision  at  tho  beginning,'  as  in 
our  translation.  So  the  Vulgate,  «  p;-i;j- 
cipio ;  and  so  Theodotion — iv  rn  apxh. 
The  Hebrew  word  nSnn  — means  properly 
beginning,  IIos.  i.  2;  Prov.  ix.  10;  but,  in 
connection  with  the  preposition,  as  here, 
rSnn? — it  means  also  before,  formerly, 
Gen.  xiii.  3  ;  xli.  21;  xliii.  18,  20 ;  Isa.  i.  26. 
^1  Being  caused  to  fly  sii-iftly.  Marg.,  with 
weariness,  or  flight.  On  the  difficult  He- 
brew expression  here — r|;^'3  fijrQ — Len- 
gerke  may  bo  consulted,  in  loc.  The 
words,  according  to  Gesenius,  and  derived 
from  t]pi,  to  go  swiftly,  and  then,  to  be 


ginning,  being  caused  to  fly  =  swiftly, 
touched  me  about  the  time  of  the 
evening  oblation. 

22  And  he  informed  me,  and 
talked  with  me,  and  said,  0  Daniel, 
I  am  now  come  forth  i' to  give  thee 
skill  and  understanding. 

''  male  thee  slilfiilof 


wearied,  to  faint,  either  witJi  running, 
Jer.  ii.  24,  or  with  severe  labor,  Isa.  xl. 
28,  or  with  sorrows,  Isa.  1.  4.  If  derived 
from  this  word,  the  meaning  in  Hophal, 
the  form  here  used  would  be,  wearied 
with  swift  running,  and  the  sense  is,  that 
Gabriel  had  borne  the  message  swiftly  to 
him,  and  appeared  before  him  as  one  does 
who  is  wearied  with  a  rapid  course.  If 
this  be  the  idea,  there  is  no  direct  allu- 
sion to  his  flying,  but  the  reference  is  to 
the  rapidity  with  which  he  had  come  on 
the  long  journey,  as  if  exhausted  by  his 
journey.  The  Latin  Vulgate  renders  it 
cito  volans — quickly  flying  ;  Theodotion, 
T:eT6fievoi,  flying;  the  Codex  Chis.  raxii 
<pep6^evoi — borne  swiftly.  The  Syriae,  '  with 
a  swift  flying  he  flew  and  came  from 
heaven.'  It  cannot  be  determined  with 
certainty,  from  the  words  used  here,  that 
the  coming  of  Gabriel  was  by  an  act  of 
flying  as  with  wings.  Tho  common  rep- 
resentation of  the  angels  in  the  old  Testa- 
ment is  not  with  wings,  though  the  Cher- 
ubim and  Seraphim  (Isa.  vi.  1,  scg^.)  aro 
represented  with  wings,  and  in  Rev.  six. 
6,  we  have  a  representation  of  an  angel 
flying.  Probably  tho  more  exact  idea 
here  is  that  of  a  rapid  course,  so  as  to  pro- 
duce weariness,  or  such  as  would  naturally 
produce  fatigue.  ^  Touched  me.  Dan- 
iel was  doubtless  at  this  time  engaged  in 
prayer.  ^  About  the  time  of  the  evening 
oblation.  The  evening  sacrifice.  This 
was  at  the  ninth  hour  of  the  day,  or  about 
three  o'clock  in  the  afternoon. 

22.  Andhe  informed  rac.  Ileb.,  Gave  me 
intelligence  or  understanding.  That  is, 
about  the  design  of  his  visit,  and  abcut 
what  would  be  hereafter.  ^  And  talked 
with  me.  Spake  unto  me.  '^  0  Daniel,  I 
am  iioiv  come  forth  to  give  thee  i^kill.—- 
Marg.,  jnake  thee  skilful  of.  The  He- 
brew is  literally,  '  to  make  thee  skilful,  or 
wise,  in  understanding.'  The  design  was 
to  give  him  information  as  to  what  was  tc- 
occur. 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    IX. 


369 


23  At  the  beginning  of  thy  sup- 
plications the  *  commandment  came 
forth,  and  I  am  come  to  show  thee ; 
for  thou  art  ''greatly  beloved:  there- 


'  word. 


i'  a  man  of  desires. 


23.  At  the  beginning  of  thy  supplica- 
tions. We  are  not  inlbrmed  ut  what  time 
Daniel  began  to  pray,  but,  as  remarked 
above,  it  is  most  natural  to  suppose  that 
he  devoted  the  day  to  praj-or,  and  had 
commenced  these  solemn  acts  of  devotion 
in  the  morning.  ^  T/ie  commandment 
came  forth.  Marg.,  word.  That  is,  the 
word  of  God.  This  evidently  means,  in 
heaven ;  and  the  idea  is,  that  as  soon  as 
he  began  to  pray  a  command  was  issued 
from  (jrod  to  Gabriel  that  he  should  visit 
Daniel,  and  convey  to  him  the  important 
message  respecting  future  events.  It  is 
fair  to  conclude  that  he  had  at  once  left 
heaven  in  obedience  to  the  order,  and  on 
this  high  embassage,  and  that  he  had 
passed  over  the  amazing  distance  between 
heaven  and  earth  in  the  short  time  during 
■which  Daniel  was  engaged  in  prayer.  If 
so,  and  if  heaven — the  peculiar  seat  of 
God — the  dwelling  place  of  angels  and 
of  the  just,  is  beyond  the  region  of  the 
fixed  stars — some  central  place  in  this  vast 
universe,  then  this  may  give  us  some  idea 
of  the  amazing  rapidity  with  which  celes- 
tial beings  may  move.  It  is  calculated 
that  there  arc  stars  so  remote  from  our 
earth,  that  their  light  would  not  travel 
down  to  us  for  many  thousand  years.  If 
so,  how  much  more  rapid  may  bo  the 
movements  of  celestial  beings  than  even 
light;  perhaps  more  than  that  of  the 
lightning's  flash — than  the  electric  fluid 
on  telegraphic  wires — though  that  moves 
at  the  rate  of  more  than  200.000  miles 
in  a  second.  Comp.  Dick's  Philosophy 
of  a  Future  State,  p.  220.  "  During  the 
few  minutes  emplo3'ed  in  uttering  this 
prayer,"  says  Mr.  Dick,  "this  angelic 
messenger  descended  from  the  celestial 
regions  to  the  country  of  Babylonia. 
This  was  a  rapidity  of  motion  surpass- 
ing the  comprehension  of  the  most  vig- 
orous imagination,  and  far  exceeding 
even  the  amazing  velocity  of  light." 
With  such  a  rapidity  it  may  be  our  pri- 
vilege yet  to  pass  from  world  to  world, 
on  errands  of  mercy  and  love,  or  to 
survey  in  distant  parts  of  the  universe 
the   wonderful  works    of  God.      •[  And 


fore  understand  the  matter,  and  con- 
sider the  vision. 

2-i  <:  Seventy  "^weeks    are    deter- 

c  They  bcjin  from  the  20th  of  Artaxerxcs. 
dNu.  14.  34;  Eze.  4.  0. 


/  am  come  to  show  thee.  To  make  theo 
acquainted  with  what  will  yet  be.  ^  For 
thou  art  greathj  beloved.  Marg.,  .as  in 
Ileb.,  'a  man  of  desires'  That  is,  he 
was  one  whose  happiness  wa.s  greatly 
desired  by  God ;  or  a  man  of  God's  de- 
light; that  is,  as  in  our  version,  greatly 
beloved.  It  was  on  this  account  that  his 
prayer  was  heard,  and  that  God  sent  to 
him  this  important  message  respecting 
what  was  to  come.  ^  Therefore  under- 
stand the  matter.  The  matter  respecting 
what  was  yet  to  occur  in  regard  to  his 
people.  *[  And  consider  the  vision.  This 
vision — the  vision  of  future  things  which 
he  was  now  about  to  present  to  his  view. 
From  this  passage  describing  the  appear- 
ance of  Gabriel  to  Daniel,  wo  may  learn 
(or)  that  our  prayers,  if  sincere,  are  heard 
in  heaven  as  soon  as  they  are  offered. 
They  enter  at  once  into  the  ears  of  God, 
and  he  regards  them  at  the  instant. 
(b)  A  command,  as  it  were,  may  be  at 
once  issued  to  answer  them — as  if  he  di- 
rected an  angel  to  bear  the  answer  at 
once,  (c)  The  angels  are  ready  to  hasten 
down  to  men,  to  communicate  the  will  of 
God.  Gabriel  came  evidently  with  plea- 
sure on  his  embassage,  and  to  a  benevo- 
lent being  anywhere  there  is  nothing 
more  grateful  than  to  bo  commissioned 
to  bear  glad  tidings  to  others.  Possibly 
that  may  be  a  part  of  the  employment  of 
the  righteous  forever,  {d  )  The  thought 
is  an  interesting  one,  if  we  are  permitted 
to  entertain  it,  that  good  angels  may  bo 
constantly  emploj'cd  as  Gabriel  was;  that 
whenever  prayer  is  offered  on  earth  they 
may  be  commissioned  to  bring  answers 
of  peace  and  mercj',  or  dispatched  to  ren- 
der aid,  and  that  thus  the  universe  maj 
be  constantly  traversed  by  these  holy  be- 
ings ministering  to  those  who  are  'heirs 
of  salvation.'     Heb.  i.  1,  4. 

24.  Seventi/  weeks  are  determined. 
Here  commences  the  celebrated  prophecy 
of  the  SEVENTY  ■WEEKS — a  portion  of 
Scripture  which  has  excited  as  much  at- 
tention, and  led  to  as  great  a  variety  of 
interpretation,  as  perhaps  any  other.  Of 
this  passage.  Prof.  Stuart  (Hints  on  the 


370 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538. 


mined  upon  thy  people  and   upon 
thy  holy  city,  to  »  finish  the  trans- 


Interpretation  of  Propheey,  p.  104),  re- 
marks, "  It  would  require  a  volume  of 
considerable  magnitude,  even  to  give  a 
history  of  the  ever-varying  and  contra- 
dictory opinions  of  critics  respecting  this 
locus  vex  a  tissimtis  ;  and  perhaps  a  still 
larger  one  to  establish  nn  exegesis  which 
would  stand.  I  am  fully  of  opinion,  that 
no  interpretation  as  yet  published,  will 
stand  the  test  of  thorough  grammatico- 
historical  criticism ;  and  that  a  candid, 
and  searching,  and  thorough  critique  here 
is  still  a  desideratum.  May  some  expo- 
sitor, fully  adequate  to  the  task,  speedily 
appear!"  After  these  remarks  of  this 
eminent  Biblical  scholar,  it  is  with  no 
great  confidence  of  success  that  I  enter  on 
the  exposition  of  the  pa^ssage.  Yet,  per- 
haps, though  all  difficulties  may  not  be 
removed,  and  though  I  cannot  hope  to 
contribute  anything  new  in  the  exposi- 
tion of  the  passage,  something  may  be 
written  which  may  relieve  it  of  some  of 
the  perplexities  attending  it,  and  which 
may  tend  to  show  that  its  author  was 
under  the  influence  of  divine  inspiration. 
The  passage  may  be  properly  divided  into 
two  parts.  The  first,  in  ver.  24,  contains 
a  general  statement  of  what  would  occur 
in  the  time  specified — the  seventy  weeks  ; 
the  second  (vs.  25-27),  contains  a  parti- 
cular statement  of  the  manner  in  which 
that  would  be  accomplished.  In  this 
Etatement,  the  whole  time  of  the  seventy 
weeks  is  broken  up  in  three  smaller 
portions  of  seven,  sixty-two  and  one — 
designating  evidently  some  important 
epochs  or  periods,  ver.  25,  and  the  last 
one  week  is  again  sub-divided  in  such  a 
way  that,  while  it  is  said  that  the  whole 
work  of  the  Messiah  in  confirming  the 
covenant  would  occupy  the  entire  week, 
yet  that  he  would  be  cut  off  in  the  middle 
of  the  week,  ver  27.  In  the  general 
statement  (ver.  24),  it  is  said  that  there 
was  a  definite  time — seventy  weeks — 
during  which  the  subject  of  the  predic- 
tion would  be  accomplished  ;  that  is,  dur- 
ing which  all  that  was  to  be  done  in 
reference  to  the  holy  city,  or  in  the  holy 
city,  to  finish  the  transgression,  to  make 
an  end  of  sin,  <tc.,  would  be  effected. 
The  things  specified  in  this  verse  are  what 
icaa  to  be  done,  as  detailed  more  particu- 
larly in  the  subsequent  verses.     The  de- 


gression, and  to  b  make  an  end  of 

'  or,  restrat7t .  ^  or,  seal  vp. 

sign  in  this  verse  seems  to  have  been  to 
furnish  a  general  statement  of  what  was 
to  occur  in  regard  to  the  holy  city — of 
that  city  which  had  been  selected  for  the 
peculiar  purpose  of  being  a  place  where 
an  atonement  was  to  be  made  for  human 
transgression.  It  is  quite  clear  that  when 
Daniel  set  apart  this  period  for  prayer, 
and  engaged  in  this  solemn  act  of  devo- 
tion, his  design  was  not  to  inquire  into 
the  ultimate  events  which  would  occur  in 
Jerusalem,  but  merely  to  pray  that  the 
purpose  of  God,  as  predicted  by  Jeremiah, 
respecting  the  captivity  of  the  nation,  and 
the  rebuilding  of  the  city  and  temple, 
might  be  accomplished.  God  took  occa- 
sion from  this,  however,  not  only  to  give 
an  implied  assurance  about  the  accom- 
plishment of  these  purposes,  but  also  to 
state  in  a  remarkable  manner  the  whole 
ultimate  design  respecting  the  holy  city, 
and  the  great  event  which  was  ever  on- 
ward to  characterize  it  among  the  cities 
of  the  world.  In  the  consideration  of  the 
Avhole  passage  (vs.  24 — 27),  it  will  be 
proper,  first,  to  examine  into  the  literal 
meaning  of  the  words  and  phrases,  and 
then  to  inquire  into  the  fulfilment.  ^  Sev- 
enty weeks,  wyyc}  D^i?3"''  Vulg.  Septna- 
ginta  hehdomades.  So  Theodotion,  "E^6o- 
liijKOVTa  iliioiiaki.  Prof.  Stuart  (Hints, 
p.  S2)  renders  this  ' seventy  sevens ;' thaX 
is,  seventy  times  seven  j'ears :  on  the 
ground  that  the  word  denoting  iveehs  in 
the  Hebrew  is  not  0'i'2U",  but  m>'au'.  "  The 
form  rrhich  is  used  here,"  says  he,  "which 
is  a  I  ?gular  masculine  plural,  is  no  doubfc 
purposely  chosen  to  designate  the  plural 
of  seven;  and  with  great  propriety  here, 
inasmuch  as  there  are  many  sevens  which 
are  to  be  joined  together  in  one  common 
sum.  Daniel  had  been  meditating  on  the 
close  of  the  seventy  years  of  Hebrew  ex- 
ile, and  the  angel  now  discloses  to  him  a 
new  period  of  seventy  times  seven,  in  which 
still  more  important  events  are  to  take 
place.  Seventy  sevens,  or  (to  use  the  Greek 
phraseology),  seventy  heptades,  are  deter- 
mined upon  thy  people.  Ileptades  of 
what?  Of  days,  or  of  years?  No  one 
can  doubt  what  the  answer  is.  Daniel 
had  been  making  diligent  search  respect- 
ing the  seventy  years ;  and,  in  such  a 
connection,  nothing  but  seventy  heptadea 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER  IX. 


371 


gins,  And  to  make  reconciliation  for 


of  years  could  be  reasonably  supposed  to 
be  meant  by  the  angel."  The  inquiry 
about  the  gender  of  tho  word,  of  which  so 
much  has  been  said  (Hengstenberg,  Chris. 
ii.  297,)  does  not  seem  to  be  very  im- 
portant, since  the  same  result  is  reached 
whether  it  be  rendered  scventi/  sevens,  or 
seventy  tceehs.  In  the  former  case  as  pro- 
posed by  Prof.  Stuart,  it  means  seventy 
sevens  of  years,  or  490  years ;  in  the 
.Dther,  seventy  iceehs  of  years;  that  is,  as 
a  xceek  of  years  is  seven  years,  seventy 
such  weeks,  or,  as  before,  490  years. 
The  usual  and  proper  meaning  of  the 
word  here  used,  however — y13t^' — is  « 
seven,  t/JJo/xaf,  hehdomad,  i.  e.  a  iceck. 
Gesenius,  Lex.  From  the  examples  where 
the  word  occurs  it  would  seem  that  the 
masculine  or  the  feminine  forms  were  used 
indiscriminately.  The  word  occurs  only 
in  the  following  passages,  in  all  of  which 
it  is  rendered  xveek,  or  loeeks,  except  in 
Ezek.  xlv.  21,  where  it  is  rendered  seven, 
to  wit,  days.  In  tho  following  passages 
the  word  occurs  in  the  masculine  form 
plural,  Dan.  ix.  24,  25,  26  ;  x.  2,  3  ;  in  the 
following  in  the  feminine  form  plural, 
Ex.  xxxiv.  22;  Num.  xxviii.26;  Deut.  xvi. 
9,  10,  16;  2  Chron.  viii.  13;  Jer.  v.  24; 
Ezek.  xlv.  21 ;  and  in  the  following  in  the 
singular  number,  common  gender,  ren- 
dered week.  Gen.  xxix.  27,  28,  and  in  the 
dual  masculine  in  Lev.  xii.  5,  rendered 
two  weeks.  From  these  passages  it  is  evi- 
dent that  nothing  certain  can  be  deter- 
mined about  the  meaning  of  the  word 
from  its  gender.  It  would  seem  to  de- 
note weiks,  periods  of  seven  days — hebdo- 
mads— in  either  form,  and  is  doubtless  so 
used  here.  The  fair  translation  would  be 
weeks  seventy  are  determined ;  that  is, 
seventy  times  seven  days,  or  four  hundred 
and  ninety  days.  But  it  may  be  asked 
here  whether  this  is  to  be  taken  literally 
as  denoting  four  hundred  and  ninety 
days?  If  not,  in  what  sense  is  it  to  be 
understood  ?  and  whj'  do  we  understand 
it  in  a  different  sense  ?  It  is  clear  that 
it  must  be  explained  literally,  as  denoting 
four  hundred  and  ninety  days,  or  that 
these  days  must  stand  for  years,  and  that 
the  period  is  four  hundred  and  ninety 
years.  That  this  latter  is  the  true  inter- 
pretatii  "s,  aa  it  has  been  held  by  all  com- 
mentatois,  is  appareiit  from  the  following 


iniquity,  and  to  bring  m  »  everlast- 
» He.  9. 12. 

considerations  :  (a)  This  is  not  uncom- 
mon in  the  prophetic  writings.  See  Notes 
on  ch.  vii.  24 — 28.  (6)  Daniel  had  been 
making  inquiry  respecting  the  seventy 
years,  and  it  is  natural  to  suppose  that 
the  answer  of  the  angel  would  have  re- 
spect to  years  also,  and,  thus  understood, 
the  answer  would  have  met  the  inquiry 
pertinently — ^"not  seventy  years,  but  a 
week  of  years — seven  times  seventy 
years."  Comp.  Matt,  xviii.  21,  22.  "In 
such  a  connection,  nothing  but  seventy 
heptades  of  years  could  be  reasonably 
supposed  to  be  meant  by  the  angel." 
Prof.  Stuart's  Hints,  &c.,  p.  82.  (c)  Years, 
as  Prof.  Stuart  remarks,  are  the  measure 
of  all  considerable  periods  of  time.  When 
the  angel  speaks,  then,  in  reference  to  cer- 
tain events,  and  declares  that  they  are  to 
take  place  during  seventy  heptades,  it  is  a 
matter  of  course  to  suppose  that  he  means 
j'ears.  (d)  The  circumstances  of  the  case 
demand  this  interpretation.  Daniel  was 
seeking  comfort  in  view  of  the  fact  that 
the  city  and  temple  had  been  desolate 
now  for  a  period  of  seventy  years.  The 
angel  comes  to  bring  him  consolation, 
and  to  give  him  assuranpes  about  the  re- 
building of  the  city,  and  the  great  events 
that  were  to  occur  there.  But  what  con- 
solation would  it  be  to  be  told  that  the 
city  would  indeed  be  rebuilt,  and  that  it 
would  continue  seventy  ordinary  weeks — 
that  is,  a  little  more  than  a  year,  before 
a  new  destruction  would  come  upon  it  ? 
It  cannot  well  be  doubted,  then,  that  by 
the  time  here  designated,  the  angel  meant 
to  refer  to  a  period  of  four  hundred  and 
ninety  years,  and  if  it  be  asked  why  this 
numbo  /  was  not  literally  and  exactly  spe- 
cified i  1  so  many  words,  instead  of  choos- 
ing a  mode  of  designation  so  obscure  com- 
paratively, it  maybe  replied,  (1)  that  the 
number  seventy  was  employed  by  Daniel 
as  tho  time  respecting  which  he  was 
making  inquiry,  and  that  there  was  a 
propriety  that  there  should  be  a  reference 
to  that  fact  in  the  reply  of  the  angel — one 
number  seventy  had  been' fulfilled  in  the 
desolations  of  the  city,  there  would  be 
another  number  seventy  in  the  events  yet 
to  occur ;  (2)  this  is  iii  the  usual  pro- 
phetic style,  when  tliere  is,  as  Hengsten- 
berg remarks  (Chris.  II.  293),  often  a 
'concealed  defiuiteness.'     I(  is  usual  to 


372 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  53S. 


ing  righteousness,  and  to  seal   up  I  the   vision    and  d^roplu  cy,  and   to 
^prophet.  anoint  the  Most  Holy. 


designate  numbers  in  this  vray.  (3)  The 
term  was  sufficiently  clear  to  be  under- 
stood, or  is,  at  all  events,  made  clear  by 
tho  result.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt 
that  Daniel  would  so  understand  it,  or 
that  it  would  be  so  interpreted,  as  fixing 
in  the  minds  of  the  Jewish  people  tho 
period  when  tho  Messiah  was  about  to 
appear.  The  meaning,  then,  is,  that 
there  would  bo  a  period  of  four  hundred 
dnd  ninety  years,  during  which  the  city, 
after  the  order  for  the  rebuilding  should 
go  forth  (ver.  25),  until  the  entire  con- 
summation of  the  great  object  for  which 
it  should  be  rebuilt,  and  that  then  the  pur- 
pose would  bo  accomplished,  and  it  would 
be  given  up  to  a  greater  ruin.  There  was 
to  be  this  long  period  in  which  most  im- 
portant transactions  were  to  occur  in  the 
city.  ^  Are  deterynincd.  The  word  here 
used— innj,  from  Tinn,  occurs  nowhere 
else  in  the  Scriptures.  It  properly  means, 
according  to  Gesenius,  to  cut  off,  to  di- 
vide ;  and  hence,  to  determine,  to  des- 
tine, to  appoint.  Theodotion  renders  it, 
(T«i'£:r/ji/3>;aau — are  cut  off,  decided,  defined. 
The  Vulgate  renders  it,  ahhreviatce  sunt. 
Luther,  tiind  hestimmet — are  determined. 
The  meaning  would  seem  to  be,  that  this 
portion  of  time — the  seventy  weeks — was 
cut  off  irom.  the  whole  of  duration,  or  cut 
out  of  it,  as  it  were,  and  set  by  itself  for 
a  definite  purpose.  It  does  not  mean  that 
it  was  cut  off  from  the  time  which  the 
city  would  naturally  stand,  or  that  this 
time  was  ahhreviated,  but  that  a  portion 
of  time,  to  wit,  four  hundred  and  ninety 
years — was  designated  or  appointed  with 
reference  to  the  city,  to  accomplish  the 
great  and  important  object  which  is  im- 
mediately specified.  A  certain,  definite 
period  was  fixed  on,  and  when  this  was 
passed,  the  promised  Messiah  would  come. 
In  regard  to  the  construction  here — the 
singular  verb  with  a  plural  noun,  see 
llengstenberg,  Christ,  in  loc.  Tho  true 
meaning  seems  to  be,  that  the  seventy 
weeks  are  spoken  of  coUcctivehj  as  de- 
noting a  period  of  time  ;  that  is,  a  period 
of  seventy  weeks  is  determined.  The 
prophet,  in  the  «se  of  the  singular  verb, 
geems  to  have  coi\tempIated  the  time,  not 
aa  separate  weekj,  or  as  particular  por- 
tions, but  as  one  period.  \  Upon  thy  peo- 
ple.    The  Jovish  people;  tho  nation  to 


which  Daniel  belonged.  This  allusion  is 
made  because  he  was  inquiring  about 
the  close  of  their  exile,  and  their  restora- 
tion to  their  own  land.  ^  And  vpon  tlit/ 
hoh/  city.  Jerusalem,  usually  called  tho 
holy  city,  because  it  was  the  place  where 
the  worship  of  God  was  celebrated.  Isa. 
lii.  1;  Neh.  xi.  1,  IS;  Matt,  xxvii.  53. 
It  is  called  '  thy  holy  city' — the  city  of 
Daniel,  because  he  was  here  making  es- 
pecial inquiry  respecting  it,  and  because 
he  was  one  of  the  Hebrew  people,  and  the 
city  was  the  capitol  of  their  nation.  As 
one  of  that  nation,  it  could  be  called  Ins. 
It  was  then,  indeed,  in  ruins,  but  it  was  to 
be  rebuilt,  .nnd  it  was  proper  to  speak  of  it 
as  if  it  were  then  a  city.  The  meaning  of 
'  «/)on  thy  people  and  city' — S^' — is,  re- 
specting,  or  concerning.  The  purpose  re- 
specting the  seventy  weeks  pe)<a?')is  to  thy 
people  and  city;  or  there  is  an  important 
period  of  four  hundred  and  seventy  years 
determined  on,  or  designated,  respecting 
that  people  and  city.  ^  To  finish  the  trans- 
gression. The  angel  proceeds  to  state 
what  was  the  object  to  be  accomplished  in 
this  purpose,  or  what  would  occur  during 
that  period.  The  first  thing  to  finish  the 
transgression.  The  margin  is,  restrain. 
Tho  Vulgate  renders  it,  tU  consummetitr 
pra;varicaiio.  Theodotion,  tdu  avvTeXtirji'ai 
afiapriav — to  finish  sin.  Thompson  ren- 
ders this,  '  to  finish  sin  offerings.'  The 
difference  between  the  marginal  reading 
— restrain,  and  the  text — finish,  arises 
from  a  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of  the 
original  word.  The  common  reading  of 
the  text  is  nS?,  but  in  39  Codices  exam- 
ined by  Kennicott,  it  is  hSd-  The  reading 
in  the  text  is  undoubtedly  the  correct  one, 
but  still  there  is  not  absolute  certainty  as 
to  the  signification  of  the  word,  whether 
it  means  to  finish,  or  to  restrain.  The 
proper  meaning  of  the  word  in  the  com- 
mon reading  of  tho  text — N73,ist0Ehut 
up,  confine,  restrain — as  it  is  rendered  in 
the  margin.  The  meaning  of  the  other 
word  found  in  many  mss.  n"'3 — is  to  be 
completed,  finished,  closed — and  in  Piel, 
the  form  used  here,  to  complete,  to  finish 
— as  it  is  translated  in  the  common  ver- 
sion. Gesenius  {Lex.)  supposes  that  th< 
word  here  is  for  n'73  meaning  to  finish, 


B.  C.  538.J 


CHAPTEll  IX. 


373 


or  complete.  Hengstenberg,  who  is  fol- 1 
lowed  in  this  view  by  Lengerke,  supposes 
that  the  moaning  is  to  '  s/miM;/)  transgres- 
sion/ and  that  the  true  reading  is  that  in 
the  text — N'Sa — though  as  that  word  is  not 
used  in  Piel,  and  as  the  Masorites  had 
some  doubt  as  to  the  derivation  of  the 
word,  they  gare  to  it,  not  its  appropriate 
pointiuijin  this  place — which  would  have 
been  sSj,  but  the  pointing  of  the  other 
word — nS^,  in  the  margin.  According  to 
Hengstenberg,  the  sense  here  of  slmUing 
vp  is  derived  from  the  general  notion  of 
restrainiitf/  or  hindering,  belonging  to  the 
word;  and  he  supposes  that  this  will  best 
accord  with  the  other  words  in  this  number 
of  the  verse — to  corer,  and  to  seal  up.  The 
idea  according  to  him  is,  that  'sin,  which 
hitherto  lay  naked  and  open  before  the 
eyes  of  a  righteous  God,  is  now  by  his 
mercy  shut  vp,  sealed,  and  covered,  so 
that  it  can  no  more  be  regarded  as  exist- 
ing— a  figurative  description  of  the  for- 
giveness of  sin.'  So  Lengerke  renders  it, 
Um  einzuschliessen  [rfeu]  Ah/all.  Ber- 
tholdt,  Bis  der  Frevcl  vollhracht.  It 
seems  most  probable  that  the  true  idea 
here  is  that  denoted  in  the  margin,  and 
that  the  sense  is  not  that  of_/?ni«Ai)i^,  but 
that  of  restraining,  closing,  shutting  vp, 
Ac.  So  it  is  rendered  by  Prof.  Stuart — 
"toresiraui  transgression."  Com. on  Dan- 
iel, in  loc.  The  word  is  used  in  this  sense 
of  shutting  up,  or  restraining,  in  several 
places  in  the  Bible:  1  Sam.  vi.  10,  'and 
ehiit  up  their  calves  at  home  ;'  Jer.  xxxii. 
3,  '  Zedekiah  had  shut  him  vp ;"  Ps. 
Ixxxviii.  8,  '  I  am  shut  vp,  and  I  cannot 
come  forth ;'  Jer.  xxxii.  2,  '  Jeremiah  the 
prophet  was  shut  up.'  The  sense  of  shut- 
ting up,  or  restraining,  accords  better 
with  the  connection  than  (hat  of  finishing. 
The  reference  of  the  whole  passage  is  un- 
doubtedly to  the  Messiah,  and  to  what 
would  be  done  sometime  during  the 
'  seventy  weeks ;'  and  the  meaning  here 
is,  not  that  he  would  'finish  transgres- 
sion'— which  would  not  be  true  in  any 
proper  sense,  but  that  he  would  do  a  work 
which  would  restrain  iniquity  in  the 
world,  or,  more  strictly,  which  would  shut 
it  up — enclose  it — as  in  a  prison,  so  that 
it  would  no  more  go  forth  and  prevail. 
The  effect  would  be  that  which  occurs 
when  one  is  shut  up  in  prison,  and  no 
longer  goes  at  large.  There  would  be  a 
restraining  power  and  influence  which 
would  check  the  progress  of  sin.  This 
32 


does  not,  I  apprehend,  refer  to  the  par- 
ticular transgressions  for  which  the  Jew- 
ish people  had  suffered  in  their  long  cap- 
tivity, but  sin  (>*y  s^)  in  general — the  sin 
of  the  world.  There  would  be  an  influ- 
ence which  would  restrain  and  curb  it,  or 
which  would  shut  it  up  so  that  it  would 
no  longer  reign  and  roam  at  large  over 
the  earth.  It  is  true  that  this  might  not 
have  been  so  understood  by  Daniel  at  the 
time,  for  the  language  is  so  general,  that 
it  might  have  suggested  the  idea  that  it 
referred  to  the  sins  of  the  Jewish  people. 
This  language,  if  there  had  been  no  far- 
ther explanation  of  it,  might  have  sug- 
gested the  idea  that  in  the  time  specified 
— seventy  weeks — there  would  be  some 
process — some  punishment — some  divine 
discipline — by  which  the  iniquities  of 
that  people,  or  their  propensity  to  sin,  for 
which  this  long  captivity  had  come  upon 
them,  would  be  cohibited  or  restrained. 
But  the  language  is  not  such  as  necessa- 
rily to  confine  the  interpretation  to  that, 
and  the  subsequent  statements,  and  the 
actual  fulfilment  in  the  work  of  the  Mes- 
siah, lead  us  to  understand  this  in  a  much 
higher  sense,  as  having  reference  to  sin 
in  general,  and  as  designed  to  refer  to 
some  work  that  would  ultimately  be  an 
eflfectual  check  on  sin,  and  which  would 
tend  to  cohibit  or  restrain  it  altogether  in 
the  world.  Thus  understood,  the  lan- 
guage will  well  describe  the  work  of  the 
Redeemer — that  work  which,  through  the 
sacrifice  made  on  the  cross,  is  adapted  and 
designed  to  restrain  sin  altogether,  ^f  And 
to  make  an  end  of  sins,  Marg.,  to  seal 
vp.  The  diflTerence  here  in  the  text  and 
the  margin  arises  from  a  difierence  in  the 
readings  in  the  Hebrew.  The  common 
reading  in  the  text  is  apn,  from  ann  — 
to  seal,  to  seal  vp.  But  the  Hebrew  mar- 
ginal reading  is  a  difi"erent  word — onri  — 
from  cnn  to  complete,  to  perfect,  to  finish. 
The  pointing  in  the  text  in  the  word  srn 
is  not  the  proper  pointing  of  that  word, 
which  would  have  been  D'.n  n,  but  the 
Masorites,  as  is  not  unfrequently  the 
case,  gave  to  the  word  in  the  text  the 
'  pointing  of  another  word  which  they 
;  placed  in  the  margin.  The  margiiial 
reading  is  found  in  55,  MSS.  (Len- 
gerke), but  the  weight  of  authority  is  de- 
cidedly in  favour  of  the  common  reading 
in  the  Hebrew  text — to  seal,  and  not  to 
finish,  as  it  is  in  our  translation.     Th* 


874 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  53& 


marginal  reading  to  finish,  was  doubtless 
substituted  by  some  transcribers,  or 
rather  sugrjested  by  the  Masorites  because 
it  seemed  to  convey  a  better  signification 
to  say  that  'sin  would  be  finished,'  than 
to  say  that  it  would  be  sealed.  The  Vul- 
gate has  followed  the  reading  in  the 
margin — et  finem  accipiat  j)^^'^'^'^^^^'"^ J 
Theodotion  has  followed  the  other  rending, 
o(ppayiaai  ajjapTla;.  Luther  also  has  it, 
to  seal.  Coverdale,  '  that  sin  may  have 
an  end.'  The  true  rendering  is,  doubtless, 
'to  seal  sin  ;'  and  the  idea  is  that  of  re- 
moving it  from  sight ;  to  remove  it  from 
view.  'The  expression  is  taken,' says 
Lengerke,  '  from  the  custom  of  sealing 
up  those  things  which  one  lays  aside, 
and  conceals.'  Thus  in  Job  ix.  7,  'And 
sealeth  up  the  stars  ;'  that  is,  he  so  shuts 
them  up  in  the  heavens  as  to  prevent 
their  shining — so  as  to  hide  them  from 
the  view.  They  are  concealed,  hidden, 
made  close — as  the  contents  of  a  letter,  a 
package,  seal,  indicating  that  no  one  is 
to  examine  them.  See  Notes  on  that 
passage.  So  also  in  Job  xxxvii.  7,  re- 
ferring to  winter,  it  is  said,  'He  sealeth 
up  the  hand  of  every  man,  that  all  men 
may  know  his  work.'  That  is,  in  the 
winter,  when  the  snow  is  on  the  ground, 
when  the  streams  are  frozen,  the  labours 
of  the  husbandman  must  cease.  The 
hands  can  no  more  be  used  in  ordinary 
toil.  Every  man  is  prevented  from  going 
abroad  to  his  accustomed  labour,  and  is, 
as  it  were,  sealed  iq)  in  his  dwelling. 
Comp.  Jer.  xxxii.  11,  14;  Isa.  xxix.  11; 
Cant.  iv.  12.  The  idea  in  the  passage 
before  us  is,  that  the  sins  of  our  nature 
will,  as  it  were,  be  sealed  up,  or  closed, 
or  hidden,  so  that  they  will  not  be  seen, 
or  will  not  develop  themselves;  that  is, 
"  they  will  be  inert,  inefficient,  powerless." 
Prof.  Stuart.  The  language  is  appli- 
cable to  anything  that  would  hide  them 
from  view,  or  remove  them  from  sight — 
as  a  book  whose  writing  is  so  sealed  that 
we  cannot  read  it ;  a  tomb  that  is  so 
closed  that  we  cannot  enter  it  and  see  its 
contents ;  a  package  that  is  so  sealed, 
that  we  do  not  know  what  is  within  it; 
a  room  that  is  so  shut  up  that  we  may 
not  enter  it,  and  see  what  is  within.  It 
is  not  to  be  supposed  that  Daniel  would 
see  clearly  how  this  was  to  be  done,  but 
we,  who  have  now  a  full  revelation  of 
the  method  by  which  God  can  remove 
siUj  can  understand  the  method  in  which 
'it  is  accomplished  by  the  blood  of  the 


atonement,  to  wit,  that  hy  that  atonement 
sin  is  now  forgiven,  or  is  treated  as  if  it 
were  hidden  from  the  view,  and  a  seal, 
which  may  not  be  broken,  placed  on  that 
which  covers  it.  The  language  thus  used, 
as  we  are  now  able  to  interpret  it,  is 
strikingly  applicable  to  the  work  of  the 
Redeemer,  and  to  the  method  by  which 
God  removes  sin.  In  not  a  few  MSS. 
and  editions,  the  word  rendered  sins  is  in 
the  singular  number.  The  amount  of 
authority  is  in  favour  of  the  common 
reading — sins — though  the  sense  is  not 
materially  varied.  The  work  would  have 
reference  to  sin,  and  the  effect  would  be 
to  seal  it,  and  hide  it  from  the  view. 
^  And  to  make  reconciliation  for  iniquity. 
More  literally,  'and  to  cover  iniquity.' 
The  word  which  is  rendered  '  to  make 
reconciliation' —  "id3  — hcrphiir,  properly 
means  to  cover  (whence  our  English  word 
cover) ;  to  cover  over,  to  overlay,  as  with 
pitch.  Gen.  vi.  14;  and  hence  to  cover 
over  sin  ;  that  is,  to  atone  for  it,  pardon 
it,  forgive  it.  It  is  the  word  which  is 
commonly  used  with  reference  to  atone- 
ment or  expiation,  and  seems  to  have 
been  so  understood  by  our  translators. 
It  does  not  necessarily  refer  to  the  means 
by  which  sin  is  covered  over,  <fee.,  by  an 
atonement,  but  is  often  used  in  the  gene- 
ral sense  of  to  pardo7t  or  forgive.  Comp. 
Notes  on  Isa.  vi.  7,  and  more  fully,  Notes 
on  Isa.  xliii.  3.  Here  there  is  no  neces- 
sary allusion  to  the  atonement  which  the 
Messiah  would  make  in  order  to  cover  over 
sin  ;  that  is,  the  word  is  of  so  general  a 
character  in  its  signification  that  it  does 
not  necessarily  imply  this,  but  it  is  the 
word  which  would  naturally  be  used  on 
the  supposition  that  it  had  such  a  refer- 
ence. As  a  matter  of  fact,  undoubtedly, 
the  means  by  which  this  was  to  be  done 
was  by  the  atonement,  and  that  was  re- 
ferred to  by  the  Spirit  of  inspiration,  but 
this  is  not  essentially  implied  in  the 
meaning  of  the  word.  In  whatever  way 
that  should  be  done,  this  word  would  be 
properly  used  as  expressing  it.  The 
Latin  Vulgate  renders  thus,  et  deleatnr  in  i- 
quitas.  Theodotion,  anaXtupai  ras  dSiKia; — 
'  to  wipe  out  iniquities.'  Luther,  '  to  re- 
concile for  transgression.'  Here  are  three 
things  specified,  therefore,  in  regard  to 
sin,  which  would  be  done.     Sin  would  be 

Hestrained, 
Sealed  7ip, 
Covered  over. 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    IX. 


875 


These  expressions,  though  not  of  the 
nature  of  a  climax,  are  intensive,  and 
show  that  the  great  work  referred  to 
pertained  to  sin,  and  would  be  designed 
to  remove  it.  Its  bearing  would  be  on 
human  transgression ;  on  the  way  by 
which  it  might  be  pardoned;  on  the 
methods  by  which  it  would  be  removed 
from  the  view,  and  be  kept  from  rising 
np  to  condemn  and  destroy.  Such  ex- 
pressions would  undoubtedly  lead  the 
mind  to  look  forward  to  some  method 
which  was  to  be  disclosed  by  which  sin 
could  be  consistently  pardoned  and  re- 
moved. In  the  remainder  of  the  verse, 
there  are  three  additional  things  which 
would  be  done  as  necessary  to  complete 
the  work : 

To  bring  in  everlasting  righteousness  ; 
To  ieal  up  the  vision  nnd  prophecjj  ;  and 
To  anoint  the  Most  Holy. 
^  And  to  bring  in  everlasting  righteousness. 
The  phrase  '  to  bring  in' — literally,  '  to 
cause  to  come,'  refers  to  some  direct 
agency  by  which  that  righteousness  would 
be  introduced  into  the  world.  It  would 
be  such  an  agency  as  would  cause  it  to 
exist;  or  as  would  establish  it  in  the 
wctfld.  The  mode  of  doing  this  is  not 
indeed  here  specified,  and  so  far  as  the 
tcord  here  used  is  concerned,  it  would  be 
applicable  to  any  method  by  which  this 
■would  be  done — whether  by  making  an 
atonement;  or  by  setting  an  example; 
or  by  persuasion  ;  or  by  placing  the  sub- 
ject of  morals  on  a  better  foundation  ;  or 
by  the  administration  of  a  just  govern- 
ment— or  in  any  other  way.  The  term 
is  of  the  most  general  character,  and  its 
exact  force  here  can  be  learned  only  by 
the  subsequently  revealed  facts  as  to  the 
way  by  which  this  would  be  accomplished. 
The  essential  idea  in  the  language  is  that 
this  would  be  introduced  by  the  Mes- 
siah, that  is,  that  he  would  be  its  author. 
The  word  righteousness  here  also — pix, 
is  of  a  general  character.  The  fair 
meaning  would  be,  that  some  method 
■would  be  introduced  by  which  men 
would  become  righteous.  In  the  for- 
mer part  of  the  verse,  the  reference  was 
to  sir — to  the  fact  of  its  existence — to  the 
manner  in  which  it  would  be  disposed  of 
— to  the  truth  that  it  would  be  coerced, 
sealed  up,  covered  over.  Here  the  state- 
ment is,  that,  in  contradistinction  from 
that,  a  method  would  be  introduced  by 
which  man  would  become,  in  fact,  righte- 


ous and  holy.  But  the  tcord  implies 
nothing  as  to  the  method  by  which  this 
would  be  done.  AVhether  it  would  be  by 
a  now  mode  of  justification,  or  by  an  in- 
fluence that  would  make  men  personally 
holy — whether  this  was  to  be  as  the  re- 
sult of  example,  or  instruction,  or  an 
atoning  sacrifice — is  not  necessarily  im- 
plied in  the  use  of  this  word.  That,  as 
in  the  cases  already  referred  to,  could  be 
learned  only  by  subsequent  developments. 
It  would  be,  doubtless,  understood  that 
there  was  a  reference  to  the  Messiah — for 
that  is  specified  in  the  next  verse  ;  and  it 
would  bo  inferred  from  this  word  that, 
under  him,  righteousness  would  reign,  or 
that  men  would  be  righteous,  but  nothing 
could  bo  argued  from  it  as  to  the  methods 
by  which  it  would  be  done.  It  is  hardly 
necessary  to  add,  that,  in  the  prophets, 
it  is  constantly  said  that  righteousness 
would  characterize  the  Messiah  and  his 
times;  that  he  would  come  to  make  men 
righteous,  and  to  set  up  a  kingdom  of 
righteousness  in  the  earth.  Yet  the  ex- 
act mode  in  which  it  was  to  be  done, 
would  be,  of  course,  more  fully  explained 
when  the  Messiah  should  himself  actually 
appear.  The  word  'everlasting'  is  used 
here  to  denote  that  the  righteousness 
would  be  permanent  and  perpetual.  In 
reference  to  the  method  of  becoming 
righteous,  it  would  be  unchanging — 
the  standing  method  ever  onward  by 
which  men  would  become  holy;  in  re- 
ference to  the  individuals  who  should 
become  righteous  under  this  system,  it 
would  be  a  righteousness  which  would 
continue  forever.  This  is  the  character- 
istic which  is  every  where  given  of  the 
righteousness  which  would  be  introduced 
by  the  Messiah.  Thus  in  Isa.  li.  6 — 8 : 
"Lift  up  your  eyes  to  the  heavens,  and 
look  upon  the  earth  beneath  ;  for  the 
heavens  shall  vanish  away  like  smoke, 
and  the  earth  shall  wax  old  like  a  gar- 
ment, and  they  that  dwell  therein  shall 
die  in  like  manner,  but  my  salvation 
shall  be  forever,  and  my  righteousness 
shall  not  be  abolished.  Hearken  unto 
me,  ye  that  know  righteousness,  the  peo- 
ple in  whose  heart  is  my  law  ;  fear  ye  not 
the  reproach  of  men,  neither  be  ye  afraid 
of  their  revilings.  For  the  moth  shall  eat 
them  up  like  a  garment,  and  the  worm 
shall  eat  them  like  wool;  but  my  righte- 
ousness shall  be  forever,  and  my  salva- 
tion from  generation  to  generation."  Bo 
Isa.  xlv.  17 :  "  For  Israel  shall  be  saved 


376 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  535 


in  the  Lord  with  an  everlasting  salvation  ;  1 
ye  shall  not  be  ashamed  nor  confounded, 
world  without  end."  Couip.  Jer.  xxxi.  3. 
The  language  used  in  the  passage  before 
us,  moreover,  is  such  ns  could  not  pro- 
perly be  applied  to  any  thing  but  that 
righteousness  which  the  Messiah  would 
introduce.  It  could  not  bo  used  in  refer- 
ence to  the  temporal  prosperity  of  the 
Jews  on  their  return  to  the  holy  land,  nor 
to  such  righteousness  as  the  nation  had 
in  former  times.  The  fair  and  proper 
meaning  of  the  term  is,  that  it  would  be 
eternal — that  which  would  endure  forever 
—  D'^cVjJ  pi>'.  It  would  place  righteous- 
ness on  a  permanent  and  enduring  foun- 
dation ;  introduce  that  which  would  en- 
dure through  all  changes,  and  exist  when 
the  heavens  would  be  no  more.  In  the 
plan  itself  there  would  be  no  change  ;  in 
the  righteousness  which  any  one  would 
possess  under  that  system  there  would  be 
perpetual  duration — it  would  exist  forever 
and  ever.  This  is  the  nature  of  that 
righteousness  by  which  men  are  now  jus- 
tified; this  is  that  which  all  who  are  in- 
terested in  the  scheme  of  redemption 
actually  possess.  The  way  in  which  this 
'everlasting  righteousness'  would  be  in- 
troduced, is  not  stated  here,  but  is  reserved 
for  future  revelations.  Probably  all  that 
the  words  would  convey  to  Daniel  would 
be,  that  there  would  be  some  method  dis- 
closed by  which  men  w  ould  become  righte- 
ous, and  that  this  would  not  be  tempo- 
rarj'  or  changing,  but  would  be  permanent 
and  eternal.  It  is  not  improper  that  we 
should  understand  it,  as  it  is  explained  by 
the  subsequent  revelations  in  the  New 
Testament,  as  to  the  method  by  which  sin- 
ners are  justified  before  God.  *^  And  to 
seal  xqy  the  vision  and  prophecy.  Marg., 
as  in  the  Heb.,  projyhet.  The  evident 
meaning,  however,  here  is  pirophecy.  The 
word  seal  is  found,  as  already  explained, 
in  the  former  part  of  the  verse — '  to  seal 
np  sins.'  The  word  vision  (for  its  mean- 
ing, see  Notes  on  Isa.  i.  1,)  need  not  be 
understood  as  referring  particularly  to  the 
visions  seen  by  Daniel,  but  should  be  un- 
derstood, like  the  word  prophecy  or  pro- 
phet here,  in  a  general  sense — as  denoting 
all  the  visions  seen  by  the  prophets — the 
eeries  of  visions  relating  to  the  future, 
which  had  been  made  known  to  the  pro- 
phets. The  idea  seems  to  be  that  they 
would  at  that  time  be  all  sealed,  in  the 
sense  that  they  would  be  closed  or  shut 
up — no   longer  open   matters — but   that 


the  fulfilment  would,  as  it  were,  closa 
them  up  forever.  Till  that  time  they 
would  be  open  for  perusal  and  study; 
then  they  would  be  closed  up  as  a  sealed 
volume  which  one  does  not  read,  but 
which  contains  matter  hidden  from  the 
view.  Comp.  Notes  on  Isa.  viii.  10: 
"Bind  up  the  testimony;  seal  the  law 
among  my  disciples."  See  also  Dan.  viii. 
26;  xii.  4.  In  Isaiah  (viii.  16),  the  mean- 
ing is,  that  the  prophecy  was  complete,  and 
the  direction  was  given  to  bind  it  up,  or  roll 
it  up  like  a  volume,  and  to  seal  it.  In  Dan. 
viii.  26,  the  meaning  is,  seal  up  the  pro- 
phecy, or  make  a  permanent  record  of 
it,  that,  when  it  is  fulfilled,  the  event 
may  be  compared  with  the  prophecy,  and 
it  may  be  seen  that  the  one  corresponds 
with  the  other.  In  the  passage  before  vis, 
Gesenius  (Lex.)  renders  it,  'to  complete, 
to  finish' — meaning  that  the  prophecies 
would  be  fulfilled.  Hengstenberg  sup- 
poses that  it  means  that  '  as  soon  as  the 
fulfilment  takes  place,  the  prophecy,  al- 
though it  retains,  in  other  respects,  its 
great  importance,  reaches  the  end  of  its 
destination,  in  so  far  as  the  view  of  be- 
lievers, who  stand  in  need  of  consolation 
and  encouragement,  is  no  longer  directed 
to  it,  to  the  future  prosperity,  but  to  that 
which  has  appeared.'  Lengerke  supposes 
that  it  means  to  confirm,  corroborate,  ra- 
tify— hekrdftijen,  hestatigen  ;  that  is,  '  the 
eternal  righteousness  will  be  given  to  the 
pious,  and  the  predictions  of  the  prophets 
will  be  confirmed  and  fulfilled.'  To  sea], 
says  he,  has  also  the  idea  of  confirming, 
since  the  contents  of  a  writing  are  se- 
cured or  made  fast  by  a  seal.  After  all, 
perhaps,  the  very  idea  here  is  that  of 
making  fast,  as  a  lock  or  seal  does — for, 
as  is  well  known,  a  seal  was  often  used 
by  the  ancients  where  a  lock  is  with  us, 
and  the  sense  may  be,  that,  as  a  seal  or 
lock  made  fast  and  secure  the  contents 
of  a  writing  or  a  book,  so  the  event,  when 
the  prophecy  was  fulfilled,  would  make 
it  fast  and  secure.  It  would  be,  as  it 
were,  locking  it  up,  or  sealing  it,  forever. 
It  would  determine  all  that  seemed  to  be 
undetermined  about  it;  settle  all  that 
seemed  to  be  indefinite,  and  leave  it  no 
longer  uncertain  what  was  meant.  Ac- 
cording to  this  interpretation,  the  mean- 
ing would  be  that  the  prophecies  would 
be  sealed  up  or  settled  by  the  coming  of 
the  Messiah.  The  prophecies  terminated 
on  him  (Comp.  Rev.  xix.  10) ;  they  would 
find  their  fulfilment  in  him  ;  they  would  be 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER  IX. 


377 


completed  in  him — ani  might  then  be 
regarded  as  closed  and  consummated — as 
a  book  that  is  fully  written  and  is  sealed 
up.  All  the  prophecies,  and  all  the 
visions,  had  a  reference  more  or  less 
direct  to  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  and 
when  he  should  appear  they  might  bo 
regarded  as  complete.  The  spirit  of  pro- 
phecy would  cease,  and  the  facts  would 
confirm  and  seal  all  that  had  been  written. 
%  And  to  anoint  the  Most  Holy.  There 
has  been  great  variety  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  this  expression.  The  word  ren- 
dered anoint — ntVD — infinitive  from  nu'p 
— (whence  the  word  Messiah  ver.  25), 
means  properly  to  strike  or  draw  the 
hand  over  anything;  to  spread  over  with 
anything,  to  smear,  to  paint,  to  anoint. 
It  is  commonly  used  with  reference  to  a 
sacred  rite,  to  anoint,  or  consecrate  by 
unction  or  anointing  to  any  office  or  use  ; 
as  e.  g.  a  priest,  Ex.  xxviii.  41;  xl.  15; 
a  prophet,  1  Kings  xix.  ]G;  Isa.  Ixi.  1; 
a  king,  1  Sam.  x.  1 ;  xv.  1 ;  2  Sam.  ii.  4; 
1  Kings  i.  34.  So  it  is  used  to  denote 
the  consecration  of  a  stone  or  column  as 
a  future  sacred  place,  Gen.  xxxi.  13  ;  or 
vases  and  vessels  as  consecrated  to  God, 
Ex.  xl.  9,  11;  Lev.  viii.  11;  Num.  vii.  1. 
THe  word  would  then  denote  a  setting 
apart  to  a  sacred  use,  or  consecrating  a 
person  or  place  as  holy.  Oil,  or  an  un- 
guent, prepared  according  to  a  specified 
rule,  was  commonly  employed  for  this 
purpose,  but  the  word  may  be  used  in  a 
figurative  sense — as  denoting  to  set  apart 
or  consecrate  in  any  way  icithont  the  use 
of  oil — as  in  the  case  of  the  Messiah. 
So  f;ir  as  this  word,  therefore,  is  con- 
cerned, what  is  here  referred  to  may  have 
occurred  without  the  literal  use  of  oil, 
by  any  act  of  consecration  or  dedication  to 
a  holy  use.  The  phrase  'the  Most  Holy' — 
Q-uS|-i  v-yp — has  been  very  variously  in- 
terpreted. By  some  it  has  been  under- 
stood to  apply  literally  to  the  Most  Holy 
place — the  Holj'  of  Holies,  in  the  tem- 
ple; by  others  to  the  whole  temple,  re- 
garded as  holy;  by  others  to  Jerusalem 
at  large  as  a  holy  place ;  and  by  others, 
as  Hengstenberg,  to  the  Christian  church 
as  a  holy  place.  By  some  the  thing  here 
referred  to  is  supposed  to  have  been  the 
consecration  of  the  Most  Holy  place  after 
Uie  rebuilding  of  the  temple ;  by  others 
the  consecration  of  the  whole  temple  ;  by 
others  the  consecration  of  the  temple  and 
city  by  the  presence  of  the  Messiah,  and 
32* 


by  others  the  consecration  of  the  Chris- 
tian church  by  his  presence.  The  phrase 
properly  means  '  Holy  of  Holies,'  or  Most 
Holy.  It  is  applied  often  in  the  Scrip- 
tures to  the  inner  sanctuary,  or  the  por- 
tion of  the  tabernacle  and  temple  con- 
taining the  ark  of  the  covenant,  the  two 
tables  of  stone,  <tc.  See  Notes  on  Matt, 
xxi.  12.  The  phrase  occurs  in  the  fol- 
lowing places  in  the  Scripture,  Ex.  xxvi. 
33,  34;  xxix.  37;  xxx.  29,  36;  xl.  10- 
Lev.  ii.  3,  10,  et  al — in  all,  in  about 
twenty-eight  places.  See  the  English- 
man's Hebrew  Concordance.  It  is  not 
necessarily  limited  to  the  inner  sanc- 
tuary of  the  temple,  but  may  be  ap- 
plied to  the  whole  house,  or  to  any- 
thing that  was  consecrated  to  God  in 
a  manner  peculiarly  sacred.  In  a  large 
sense,  possibly  it  might  apply  to  Jerusa- 
'  lem,  though  I  am  not  aware  that  it  ever 
occurs  in  this  sense  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  in  a  figurative  sense  it  might  bo 
applied  undoubtedlj^  as  Hengstenberg 
supposes,  to  the  Christian  church,  though 
it  is  certain  that  it  is  not  elsewhere 
'  thus  used.  In  regard  to  the  meaning  of 
I  the  expression — an  important  and  diffi- 
cult one,  as  is  admitted  by  all — there  are 
five  principal  opinions  which  it  may  be 
well  to  notice.  The  truth  will  be  found 
in  one  of  them.  (1)  That  it  refers  to  the 
consecration  by  oil  or  anointing  of  the 
temple  that  would  be  rebuilt  after  the 
captivity,  by  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua. 
This  was  the  opinion  of  Michaelis  and 
Jahn.  But  to  this  opinion  there  are  in- 
superable objections  :  (a)  that,  according 
to  the  uniform  tradition  of  the  Jews,  the 
holy  oil  was  wanting  in  the  second  tem- 
ple. In  the  case  of  the  first  temple  there 
might  have  been  a  literal  anointing, 
though  there  is  no  evidence  of  that,  as 
there  was  of  the  anointing  of  the  vessels 
of  the  tabernacle,  Ex.  xxx.  22,  Ac.  But 
in  the  second  temple  there  is  every  evi- 
'.  dence  that  there  can  be,  that  there  was 
I  no  literal  anointing.  (6)  The  time  here 
referred  to  is  a  fatal  objection  to  this 
opinion.  The  period  is  seventy  weeks 
of  years,  or  four  hundred  and  ninety 
years.  This  cannot  be  doubted  (se» 
Notes  on  the  first  part  of  the  verse)  to  be 
the  period  referred  to  ;  but  it  is  absurd 
to  suppose  that  the  consecration  of  the 
new  temple  would  be  deferred  for  so  long 
a  time,  and  there  is  not  the  slightest  evi- 
dence that  it  war.  This  opinion,  there- 
fore, cannot  be  entertained.      (2)  The 


378 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538 


second  opinion  is,  that  it  refers  to  the 
re-consecration  and  cleansing  of  the  tem- 
ple after  the  abominations  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes.  See  Notes  on  ch.  viii.  14. 
But  this  opinion  is  liable  substantially  to 
Ihe  same  objections  as  the  other.  The 
cleansing  of  the  temple,  or  of  the  sanc- 
tuarj',  as  it  is  said  in  ch.  viii.  14,  did  not 
occur  four  hundred  and  ninety  years 
after  the  order  to  rebuild  the  temple 
(ver.  25),  but  at  a  much  earlier  period. 
By  no  art  of  construction,  if  the  period 
here  referred  to  is  four  hundred  and 
ninety  years,  can  it  be  made  to  apply  to 
the  re-dedication  of  the  temple  after  An- 
tiochus had  defiled  it.  (3)  Others  have 
supposed  that  this  refers  to  the  Messiah 
himself,  and  that  the  meaning  is,  that  he, 
who  was  most  holy,  would  then  be  con- 
secrated or  anointed  as  the  Messiah.  It 
is  probable,  as  Ilengstenberg  (Christ,  ii. 
321,  322)  has  shown,  that  the  Greek 
translators  thus  understood  it,  but  it  is  a 
sufficient  objection  to  this  that  the  phrase, 
though  occurring  many  times  in  the 
Scriptures,  is  never  applied  to  persons, 
unless  this  be  an  instance.  Its  uniform 
and  proper  application  is  to  things,  or 
places,  and  it  is  undoubtedly  so  to  be  un- 
derstood in  this  place.  (4)  Ilengsten- 
berg supposes  (pp.  325— 32S),  that  it 
refers  to  the  Christian  church  as  a  holy 
place,  or  '  the  New  Temple  of  the  Lord,' 
'the  church  of  the  New  Covenant,'  as 
consecrated  and  supplied  with  the  gifts 
of  the  Spirit.  But  it  is  a  sufficient  refu- 
tation of  this  opinion  that  the  phrase  is 
nowhere  else  so  used ;  that  it  has  in  the 
Old  Testament  a  settled  meaning  as  refer- 
ring to  the  tabernacle  or  the  temple  ;  that 
it  is  nowhere  employed  to  denote  a  col- 
lection of  jieoplc,  any  more  than  it  is  an 
individual  person — an  idea  which  Ilengs- 
tenberg himself  expressly  rejects  (p.  322)  ; 
and  that  there  is  no  proper  sense  in  which 
it  can  bo  said  that  the  Christian  church 
is  anointed.  The  language  is  undoubtedly 
to  be  understood  as  referring  to  some 
l>lace  that  is  to  be  thus  consecrated,  and 
the  uniform  Hebrew  usage  would  lead  to 
the  supposition  that  there  is  reference,  in 
Eome  sense,  to  the  temple  at  Jerusalem. 
f5)  It  seems  to  me,  therefore,  that  the 
obvious  and  fair  interpretation  is,  to  refer 
**j  to  the  temple — as  the  holy  place  of 
God  ;  his  peculiar  abode  on  earth.  Strictly 
and  properly  speaking,  the  phrase  would 
apply  to  the  inner  room  of  the  temple — 
the  sanctuary  properly  so    called   (see 


Notes  on  Heb.  ix.  2) ;  but  it  might  be 
applied  to  the  whole  temple  as  conse- 
crated to  the  service  of  God.  If  it  be 
asked,  then,  what  anointing,  or  conse- 
cration is  referred  to  here,  the  reply,  as 
it  seems  to  me,  is,  not  that  it  was  then 
to  be  set  apart  anew,  or  to  be  dedicated ; 
not  that  it  was  literally  to  be  anointed 
with  the  consecrating  oil,  but  that  it  was 
to  be  consecrated  in  the  highest  and 
best  sense  by  the  presence  of  the  Mes- 
siah— that  by  his  coming  there  was  to  be 
a  higher  and  more  solemn  consecration 
of  the  temple  to  the  real  purpose  for 
which  it  was  erected,  than  had  occurred 
at  any  time.  It  was  reared  as  a  holy 
place;  it  would  become  eminently  holy 
by  the  presence  of  him  who  would  come 
as  the  anointed  of  God,  and  his  coming 
to  it  would  accomplish  the  purpose  for 
which  it  was  erected,  and  with  reference 
to  which  all  the  rites  observed  there  had 
been  ordained,  and  then,  this  work  having 
been  accomplished,  the  temple,  and  all 
the  rites  apjicrtaining  to  it,  would  pass 
away.  In  confirmation  of  this  view,  it 
may  be  remarked,  that  there  are  repeated 
allusions  to  the  coming  of  the  Messiah  to 
the  second  temple,  reared  after  the  return 
from  the  captivity — as  that  which  would 
give  a  peculiar  sacredness  to  the  temple, 
and  which  would  cause  it  to  surpass  in  glory 
all  its  ancient  splendour.  So  in  Haggai  ii. 
7 — 9  :  "And  I  will  shake  all  nations,  and 
the  desire  of  all  nations  shall  come  ;  and  I 
will  fill  this  house  with  glory,  saith  the 
Lord  of  hosts.  The  glory  of  this  latter 
house  shall  be  greater  than  the  former 
saith  the  Lord  of  hosts;  and  in  this  place 
will  I  give  peace,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts." 
So  Mai.  iii.  1,  2  :  "  The  Lord,  whom  ye 
seek,  shall  suddenly  come  to  his  temple, 
even  the  messenger  of  the  covenant  whom 
ye  delight  in  ;  behold  he  shall  come,  saith 
the  Lord  of  hosts.  But  who  may  abide 
the  day  of  his  coming?  And  who  shall 
stand  when  he  appeareth  ?  For  he  is 
like  a  refiner's  fire,  and  like  the  fuller's 
soap,"  <fec.  Comp.  Matt.  xii.  6  :  "But  I 
say  unto  you,  that  in  this  place  is  one 
greater  than  the  temple."  Using  the 
word  anoint,  therefore,  as  denoting  to  con- 
secrate, to  render  holy,  to  set  apart  to  a 
sacred  use,  and  the  phrase  holy  of  holies 
to  designate  the  temple  as  such,  it  seems 
to  me  most  probable  that  the  reference 
here  is  to  the  highest  consecration  which 
could  be  made  of  the  temple  in  the  esti- 
mation of  a  Hebrew,  or  in  fact,  the  pre8< 


B.C.  538.]  CHAPTER   IX.  379 

25    Know  therefore   and  under-  stand,  that  from  the  going  forth  of 


ence  of  the  Messiah,  .as  giving  .i  sacred- 
ness  to  that  edifice  whieh  nothing  else  did 
give  or  could  give,  and,  therefore,  as  meet- 
ing all  the  proper  force  of  the  language 
used  here.  On  the  supposition  that  it 
was  designed  that  there  should  bo  a  refer- 
ence to  this  event,  this  would  be  such 
language  as  would  have  been  not  unnat- 
urally employed  by  a  Hebrew  prophet. 
And  if  it  be  so,  this  may  be  regarded 
a?  the  probable  meaning  of  the  passage. 
In  ihis  sense,  the  temple  which  was  to  be 
reared  again,  and  about  which  Daniel  felt 
so  solicitous,  would  receive  its  highest — 
its  truest  consecration — as  connected  with 
an  event  which  was  to  bring  in  everlasting 
righteousness,  and  to  seal  up  the  vision 
and  the  prophecy. 

25.  Know,  therefore,  and  understand. 
Hengstenberg  renders  this,  'and  thou 
wilt  know  and  understand  ;'  and  supposes 
that  the  design  of  Gabriel  is  to  awaken 
the  attention  and  interest  of  Daniel  by 
the  assurance  that,  if  he  would  give  atten- 
tion, he  would  understand  the  subject  by 
the  explanation  which  he  was  about  to 
give.  So  also  Theodotion  renders  it  in 
the  future  tense.  The  Hebrew  is  in  the 
future  tense,  and  would  probably  convey 
the  idea  that  he  might  or  would  know 
and  understand  the  matter.  So  Lengerke 
renders  it,  Und  so  mof/est  dn  icissen,  &c. 
The  object  is  doubtless  to  call  the  atten- 
tion of  Daniel  to  the  subject,  with  the  as- 
surance that  he  might  comprehend  the 
great  points  of  the  communication  which 
ho  was  about  to  make  respecting  the 
seventy  weeks.  In  the  previous  verse, 
the  statement  was  a  general  one;  in  this, 
the  angel  states  the  time  when  the  period 
of  the  seventy  weeks  was  to  commence, 
and  then  that  the  whole  period  was  to  be 
broken  up  or  divided  into  three  smaller 
portions  or  epochs,  each  evidently  mark- 
ing some  important  event,  or  constituting 
an  important  era.  The  first  period  of 
seven  weeks  was  evidently  to  be  charac- 
terized by  something  in  which  it  would 
be  difl'erent  from  that  which  would  follow, 
or  it  would  reach  to  some  important 
epoch,  and  then  would  follow  a  continu- 
ous period  of  sixty  two  weeks,  after 
which,  during  the  remaining  one  week, 
to  '(omplete  the  whole  number  of  seventy, 
the  Messiah  would  come  and  would  be 
cut  ofl',  and  the  series  of  desolations  would 


commence  which  would  result  in  the  en- 
tire destruction  of  the  city.  ^  That/ron* 
the  rjoinj  forth  of  the  commandment.    Ileb. 

'of  the  word' \^-\.    It  is  used,  however, 

as  in  ver.  23,  in  the  sense  of  command- 
ment or  order.  The  expression  '  gone 
forth' —  N;i"D — would  properly  apply  to 
the  issuing  of  an  order  or  decree.  So  in 
ver.  23, —  n3"3  NX; — 'tho  commandment 
went  forth.'  The  word  properly  means  a 
going  forth,  and  is  applied  to  the  rising 
sun,  that  goes  forth  from  the  east,  Ps. 
xix.  7  ;  then  a  2}lace  of  going  forth,  as  a 
gale,  a  fountain  of  waters,  the  east,  &c. 
Ezek.  xlii.  11;  Is.  xli.  18;  Ps.  Ixxv.  7. 
The  word  here  has  undoubted  reference 
to  tne  promulgation  of  a  decree  or  com- 
mand, but  there  is  nothing  in  the  words 
to  determine  b)/  lohom  the  command  was 
to  be  issued.  So  far  as  the  language  is 
concerned,  it  would  apply  equally  well  to 
a  command  issued  by  God,  or  by  the  Per- 
sian king,  and  nothing  but  the  circum- 
stances can  determine  which  is  referred 
to.  Hengstenberg  supposes  that  it  is  the 
former,  and  that  the  reference  is  to  the 
divine  purpose,  or  the  command  issued 
from  'the  heavenly  council'  to  rebuild 
Jerusalem.  But  the  more  natural  and 
obvious  meaning  is,  to  understand  it  of 
the  command  actually  issued  by  the  Per- 
sian monarch  to  restore  and  build  the  city 
of  Jerusalem.  This  has  been  the  inter^ 
pretation  given  by  the  great  body  of  ex- 
positors, and  the  reasons  for  it  seem  to  be 
perfectly  clear:  (a)  This  would  be  tho 
interpretation  afiixed  to  it  naturally,  if 
there  were  no  theory  to  support,  or  if  it 
did  not  open  a  chronological  difBculty  not 
easy  to  settle.  (6)  This  is  the  only  in- 
terpretation which  can  give  any  thing 
like  definiteness  to  tho  passage.  Its 
purpose  is  to  designate  some  fixed  and 
certain  period  from  whieh  a  reckoning 
could  be  made  to  the  time  when  the  Mes- 
siah would  come.  But,  so  far  as  appears, 
there  was  no  such  definite  and  marked 
command  on  the  part  of  God;  no  period 
which  can  be  fixed  upon  when  he  gave 
commandment  to  restore  and  build  Jeru- 
salem ;  no  exact  and  settled  point  from 
which  one  could  reckon  as  to  the  period 
when  the  Messiah  would  come.  It  seems 
to  me,  therefore,  to  be  clear,  that  the  allu- 
sion is  to   some  order   to   rebuild    tho 


m 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538 


the  commandment  to  » restore  and  |  to  build  Jerusalem  unto  the  Messiah 

'  or,  build  again.  ] 


city,  and  as  this  order  could  come  only 
from  one  wbo  liad  at  that  time  juris- 
diction over  Jerusalem  and  Judea,  and 
■who  could  command  the  resources  neces- 
sary to  rebuild  the  ruined  city,  that  order 
must  be  one  that  would  emanate  from  the 
reigning  power;  that  is,  in  fact,  the  Per- 
sian power — for  that  was  the  power  that 
had  jurisdiction  at  the  close  of  the  sev- 
enty years'  exile.  But,  as  there  were 
several  orders  or  commands  in  regard  to 
the  restoration  of  the  city  and  the  temple, 
and  as  there  has  been  much  difficulty  in 
ascertaining  the  exact  chronology  of  the 
events  of  that  remote  period,  it  has  not 
been  easy  to  determine  the  precise  order 
referred  to,  or  to  relieve  the  whole  sub- 
ject from  perplexity  and  difficulty.  Len- 
gerko  supposes  that  the  reference  here  is 
the  same  as  in  ver.  2,  to  the  promise 
made  to  Jeremiah,  and  that  this  is  the  true 
point  from  which  the  reckoning  is  to  be 
made.  The  exact  edict  referred  to  will 
be  more  properly  considered  at  the  close 
of  the  verse.  All  that  is  necessarilv  Im- 
plied here  is,  that  the  time  from  which 
the  reckoning  is  to  be  commenced  is  some 
command  or  order  issued  to  restore  and 
build  Jerusalem.  ^  To  restore.  Marg., 
build  atjain.  The  Hebrew  is  properly  to 
cause  to  return —  3'"^''^i^.  The  icord  might 
be  applied  to  the  return  of  the  captives  to 
their  own  land,  but  it  is  evidently  here 
used  with  reference  to  the  city  of  Jerusa- 
lem, and  the  meaning  must  be,  to  restore 
it  to  its  former  condition.  It  was  evi- 
dently the  purpose  to  cause  it  to  return, 
as  it  were,  to  its  former  splendour;  to  re- 
instate it  in  its  former  condition  as  a  holy 
city — the  city  where  the  worship  of  God 
would  be  celebrated,  and  it  is  this  pur- 
pose which  is  referred  to  here.  The  word, 
in  Iliphil,  is  used  in  this  sense  of  restoring 
to  a  former  state,  or  to  renew,  in  the  fol- 
lowing places,  Ps.  Ixxx.  3  :  "  Turn  us 
again — upV'-'jl — ^^^  cause  thy  face  to 
shine."  So  vs.  7, 19,  of  the  same  Psalm. 
Isa.  i.  26  :  "And  I  will  restore  thj^  judges 
as  at  the  first,"  <fec.  The  meaning  here 
would  be  met  by  the  supposition  that  Je- 
rusalem was  to  be  put  into  its  former  con- 
dition. ^  And  to  build  Jerusalem.  It 
was  then  in  ruins.  The  command,  which 
is  referred  to  here,  must  be  one  to  build 
it  up  again — its  houses,   temple,  walls; 


and  the  fair  sense  is,  that  some  such  or- 
der would  be  issued,  and  the  reckoning 
of  the  seventy  weeks  must  ber/in  at  the 
issuing  of  this  command.  The  proper 
interpretation  of  the  prophecy  demands 
that  that  time  shall  be  assumed  in  endea- 
vouring to  ascertain  when  the  seventy 
weeks  would  terminate.  In  doing  this, 
it  is  evidently  required  in  all  fairness  that 
wo  should  not  take  the  time  when  the 
Messiah  did  appear — or  the  birth  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  assuming  that  to  be  the 
teryninus  ad  quein — the  point  to  which  the 
seventy  weeks  were  to  extend — and  then 
to  reckon  backicard  for  a  space  of  four 
hundred  and  ninety  years,  to  sec  whether 
we  cannot  find  some  event  which  by 
a  possible  construction  would  bear  to  be 
applied  as  the  terminus  a  quo,  the  point 
from  which  we  are  to  begin  to  reckon,  but 
we  arc  to  ascertain  when,  in  fact,  the  or- 
der was  given  to  rebuild  Jerusalem,  and 
to  make  that  the  terminus  a  quo — tho 
starting  point  in  the  reckoning.  The 
consideration  in  the  fulfilment  of  this 
may  with  propriety  be  reserved  to  the 
close  of  the  verse.  ^  Unto  the  Messiah, 
The  word  Messiah  occurs  but  four  times 
in  the  common  version  of  the  Scriptures  : 
—Dan.  ix.  25,  26;  John  i.  41;  iv.  25. 
It  is  synonymous  in  meaning  with  the 
word  Christ,  the  Anointed,  Notes  on  Matt, 
i.  1.  Messiah  is  the  Hebrew  word;  Christ 
the  Greek.  The  Hebrew  word —  n-U'D 
— occurs  frequently  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  with  the  exception  of  these  two 
places  in  Daniel,  it  is  uniformly  trans- 
lated anointed,  and  is  applied  to  priests, 
to  prophets,  and  to  kings,  as  being  origi- 
nally set  apart  to  their  offices  by  solemn 
acts  of  anointing.  So  faras  the /ajigriiajre 
is  concerned  here,  it  might  be  applied  to 
any  one  who  sustained  their  offices,  and 
the  proper  application  is  to  be  determined 
from  tho  connection.  Our  translators 
have  introduced  the  article — 'unto  the 
Messiah.'  This  is  wanting  in  the  He- 
brew, and  should  not  have  been  intro- 
duced, as  it  gives  a  definiteness  to  the 
prophecy  which  the  original  language 
does  not  necessarilj- demand.  Our  trans- 
lators undoubtedlj-  understood  it  as  refer- 
ing  to  him  who  is  known  as  the  Messiah, 
but  this  is  not  nece;5sarily  implied  in  the 
original.    AU  that  the  language  fairly 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER   IX, 


381 


the  Prince  sliall  he  seven  weeks,  and  shall  =■  be  built  again,  and  the  ^  wall, 

even  <^  in  ■■  troublous  times. 


threescore  and  two  vreeks  :  the  street 
»  return  and  he  builded.    •> or,  breach,  or,  ditch. 


<:  No.  4.  8.  &o.;  6.  15.        <» slrail  of. 


conveys    is,     '  Until    an    anointed   one.' ;  viou.s,  since  an  accurate  date  had  been 
Who   that  was  to  be,  is  to  be  determined  '  given."     Christol.  ii.  334,  335.     The  Vul- 


from  other  circumstances  than  the  mere 
use  of  the  language,  and  in  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  language  it  should  not  be 
assumed  that  the  reference  is  to  any  par- 
ticular individual.  That  some  eminent 
personage  is  designated,  some  one  who 
by  way  of  eminence  would  be  properly  re- 


gate  renders  this.  Usque  ad  Christum  du- 
cem — '  oven  to  Christ  the  leader,'  or  ruler. 
The  Syriac,  'to  the  advent  of  Christ  the 
king.'  Theodotion,  ewj  Xpiardv  j)you^£K)u — 
'to  Christ  the  leader,'  or  ruler.  The 
question  whether  this  refers  to  Christ, 
will  be  more  appropriately  considered  at 


garded  as  anointed  of  God;  some  one  who  the  close  of  the  verse.  The  inquiry  will 
would  act  so  important  a  part  as  to  char-  then  occur,  also,  whether  this  refers 
acterize  the  age,  or  determine  the  epoch  to  his  birth,  or  to  his  appearance  as  the 
in  which  he  should  live;  some  ono  so;  anointed  one — his  taking  upon  himself 
prominent  that  he  could  be  referred  to  publicly  the  office.  The  language  would 
as  '  anointed,'  with  no  more  definite  ap-  ^  apply  to  either,  though  it  would  perhaps 
pellation ;  some  ono  who  would  be  un-  more  properly  refer  to  the  latter — to  the 
derstood  to  be  referred  to  by  the  mere  '  time  when  he  should  appear  as  such — or 
use  of  this  language,  m.ay  be  fairly  con-  ■  should  be  anointed,  crowned,  or  set  apart 
eluded   from   the    expression    used  —  for  i  to  the  office,  and  bo  fully  instituted  in  it 


the  angel  clearly  meant  to  imply  this, 
pnd  to  direct  the  mind  forward  to  some 
one  who  would  have  such  a  prominence 
in  the  history  of  the  world.  The  object 
now  is  merely  to  ascertain  the  meaning 
of  the  language.  All  that  is  fairly  im- 
plied is,  that  it  refers  to  some  one  who 
wouldhavesuch  aprominenceas  anointed, 
or  set  apart  to  the  office  of  prophet,  priest, 
or  king,  that  it  could  be  understood  that 
be   -was   referred  to  by  the  use   of  this 


It  could  not  be  demonstrated  that  either 
of  these  applications  would  be  a  departure 
from  the  fair  interpretation  of  the  words, 
and  the  application  must  bo  determined 
by  some  other  circumstances,  if  any  are 
expressed.  What  those  are  in  the  case, 
will  be  considered  at  the  close  of  the 
verse.  ^  The  Prince.  n>j3^.  This  word 
properly  means  a  leader,  a  prefect,  a 
It   is    a  word  of  very 


prince,      it   is    a  word  of  very  general 

,  rrv,         r  ■  i  *     w    I  character,  and   might  be  applied  to  ami 

language.     The   reference   is    not  to   <,c  ^  j^^^^^  ^/^.^I^^^     .° .  -".  J 


anointed  one,  as  of  one  who  was  already 
known  or  looked  forward  to  as  such — for 
then  the  article  would  have  been  used, 
but  to  some  one  who,  when  he  appeared, 
would  have  such  marked  characteristics 
that  there  would  be  no  difficulty  in  deter- 
mining that  he  was  the  one  intended. 
Hengstenberg  well  remarks,  "  We  must. 


It  is  applied  to  an  over, 
seer,  or,  as  we  should  say,  a  secretary  of 
the  treasury,  1  Chron.  xxvi.  24,  2  Chron. 
xxxi.  12;  an  overseer  of  the  temple, 
1  Chron.  ix.  11,  2  Chron.  xxxi.  13;  of 
the  palace,  2  Chron.  xxviii.  7,  and  of 
military  affairs,  1  Chron.  xiii.  1,  2  Chron. 
xxxii.  21.  It  is  also  used  absolutely  to 
denote  a  prince  of  a  people,  any  one  of 
royal  dignity,  1  Sam.  ix.  16,  x.  1,  xiii.  14. 
So  far  as  this  tcord,  therefore, 


therefore,   translate,   an   anointed  one,   a 

Prince,  and  assume  that  the  prophet,  in    Qgsg',i,„^ 

accordance  with  the  uniform  character  of  I  •-__,..'.  J  u  ™„,.i  i  „   „i    *  •      ' 

,  .  ,  ,  ,,  •    1  e   -i      IS  concerned.  It  would  apply  to  a;i)/ prince 

his  prophecy,  chose  the  more  indeiinite,  I    _  1q„j_,  „:'-i  „     „-i-i  "^  r 

^     '        ■"  J  /.    -i      1     •        ,-         or  leader,  civil  or  military;  any  one  of 

more  definite  designation,  L.„„„i   j: ;,.„   „    „.       i,      ,i   j-  l-        •  i 

,        o  •   t  J  royal  dignity,  or  who  should  distinsruish 

V   of   an  anointed   one,   a    i,:™,„ip     „    "    i     u-        ir     i      i      •       ■    -, 
^  '        himself,  or  make  himself  a  leader  in  civil, 


instead  of  the 
and  spoke   only 

prince,  instead  of  the  anointed  one,  the 
prince — Ka/  i^oxt'ir — and  left  his  hearers 
to  draw  a  deeper  knowledge  respecting 
him,  from  the  prevailing  expectations, 
grounded  on  earlier  prophecies  of  a  fu- 
ture great  king,  from  the  remaining  de- 
clarations of  the  context,  and  from  the 
fulfilment,  the  coincidence  of  which  with 
tho  prophecy  must  here  be  the  more  ob- 


ecclesiastical,  or  military  affairs,  or  who 
should  receive  an  appointment  to  any 
such  station.  It  is  a  word  which  would 
be  as  applicable  to  the  Messiah  as  to  any 
other  leader,  but  which  has  nothing  in 
itself  to  make  it  necessary  to  apply  it  to 
him.  All  that  can  be  fairly  deduced  from 
its  use  here  is,  that  it  would  be  some 
prominent  leader,-  some  one  that  would 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  53a 


be  known  without  any  more  definite  de- 
signatiou ;  some  one  on  whom  the  mind 
would  naturally  rest,  and  some  one  to 
whom  when  he  appeared  it  would  be  ap- 
plied without  hesitation  and  without  dif- 
ficulty. There  can  bo  no  doubt  that  a 
Hebrew,  in  the  circumstances  of  Daniel, 
and  with  the  known  views  and  expecta- 
tions of  the  Hebrew  people,  would  apply 
Buch  a  phrase  to  the  Messiah.  ^  Shall 
be  seven  tceeka.  See  Notes  on  ver.  24. 
The  reason  for  dividing  the  whole  period 
into  seven  weeks,  sixty-two  weeks,  and 
one  week,  is  not  formally  stated,  and  will 
be  considered  at  the  close  of  the  verse. 
All  that  is  necessary  here  in  order  to  an 
explanation  of  the  language,  and  of  what 
is  to  be  anticipated  in  the  fulfilment,  is 
this  :  (a)  That  according  to  the  above  in- 
terpretation (ver.  24),  the  period  would 
be  forty-nine  years,  (h)  That  this  was  to 
be  the  first  portion  of  the  whole  time,  not 
time  that  would  be  properly  taken  out  of 
any  part  of  the  whole  period,  (c)  That 
there  was  to  be  some  event  at  the  end  of 
the  forty-nine  years  which  would  desig- 
nate a  period,  or  a  natural  division  of 
the  time,  or  that  the  portion  which  was 
designated  by  the  forty-nine  years  was  to 
be  distinctly  characterized  from  the  next 
period  referred  to  as  sixty-two  weeks, 
and  the  next  period  as  one  week,  (rf)  No 
intimation  is  given  iu  the  words  as  to  the 
nature  of  this  period,  or  as  to  what  would 
distinguish  one  portion  from  the  others, 
and  iohat  that  was  to  bo  is  to  be  learned 
from  subsequent  explanations,  or  from 
the  actual  course  of  events.  If  one  pe- 
riod was  characterized  by  war,  and  an- 
other by  peace;  one  in  building  the  city 
and  the  walls,  and  the  other  by  quiet 
prosperity;  one  by  abundance,  and  the 
other  by  famine  ;  one  by  sickness,  and 
the  other  by  health,  all  that  is  fairly  im- 
plied in  the  words  would  be  met.  It  is 
foretold,  only,  that  there  would  be  some- 
tfiiiif/  that  would  designate  these  periods, 
and  serve  to  distinguish  the  one  from  the 
other.  ^  And  threescore  and  tivo  weeks. 
Sixty-two  weeks;  that  is,  as  above  ex- 
plained (ver.  24),  four  hundred  and  thirty- 
four  years.  The  fair  meaning  is,  that 
there  would  be  something  which  would 
characterize  that  long  period,  and  serve 
to  distinguish  it  from  that  which  pre- 
ceded it.  It  is  not  indeed  intimated  what 
that  would  be,  and  the  nature  of  the  case 
seems  to  require  that  we  should  look  to 
tbe  ereats — to  the  facts  in  the  course  of 


the  history  to  determine  what  that  was. 
Whether  it  was  peace,  prosperity,  quiet, 
order,  or  tho  prevalence  of  religion  as 
contrasted  with  the  former  period,  all  that 
the  words  fairly  imply  would  be  fulfilled 
in  either  of  them.  ^  The  street  shall  be 
huilt  again.  This  is  a  general  assertion 
or  prediction,  which  does  not  seem  to 
have  any  special  reference  to  the  time 
when  it  would  be  done.  The  fair  inter- 
pretation of  the  expression  does  not  re- 
quire us  to  understand  that  it  should  be 
after  the  united  period  of  the  seven  weeks 
and  the  sixty-two  weeks,  nor  during  either 
one  of  those  periods ;  that  is,  the  language 
is  not  such  that  we  are  necessarily  re- 
quired to  afiix  it  to  any  one  period.  It 
seems  to  be  a  general  assurance  designed 
to  comfort  Daniel  with  the  promise  that 
the  walls  and  streets  of  Jerusalem,  now 
desolate,  would  be  built  again,  and  that 
this  would  occur  sometime  during  this  pe- 
riod. His  mind  was  particularly  anxious 
respecting  the  desolate  condition  of  the 
city,  and  the  declaration  is  here  made  that 
it  would  be  restored.  So  far  as  the  lan- 
guage— the  grammatical  construction,  is 
concerned,  it  seems  to  me  that  this  would 
be  fulfilled  if  it  were  done  either  at  the 
time  of  the  going  forth  of  the  command- 
ment, or  during  either  of  the  periods  de- 
signated, or  even  after  these  periods.  It  is, 
however,  most  natural,  in  the  connection, 
to  understand  it  of  the  first  period — the 
seven  weeks — or  the  forty-nine  years, 
since  it  is  said  that  'the  commandment 
would  go  forth  to  restore,  and  to  build 
Jerusalem,'  and  since,  as  the  whole  sub- 
sequent period  is  divided  into  three  por- 
tions, it  may  be  presumed  that  the  thing 
that  would  characterize  the  first  portion, 
or  that  which  would  first  be  done,  would 
be  to  execute  the  commandment;  that  is, 
to  restore  and  build  the  city.  These 
considerations  would  lead  us,  therefore,  to 
suppose,  that  the  thing  which  would 
characterize  the  first  period — the  forty- 
nine  years — would  be  the  rebuilding  of 
the  city;  and  the  time — a  time  which, 
considering  the  extent  and  entireness  of 
the  ruins,  the  nature  of  the  opposition 
that  might  be  encountered,  the  difliculty 
of  collecting  enough  from  among  the  ex- 
iles to  return  and  do  it,  the  want  of 
means,  and  the  embarrassments  which 
such  an  undertaking  might  be  supposed 
to  involve,  cannot,  probably,  be  regarded 
as  too  long.  The  word  rendered  street— 
jirrp — means  a  street,  so  called  from  iti 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER   IX. 


383 


Ireadth,  and  would  properly,  tberefore,  be 
applied  to  a  wide  street.  Then  it  denotes 
a  market-place,  or  a  forum,  tho  broad 
open  place  at  the  gates  of  Oriental  cities 
■svhere  public  trials  were  held,  and  things 
exposed  to  sale.  2  Chron.  xxxii.  6.  In 
Ezra  X.  9,  the  word  refers  to  the  area  or 
court  before  the  temple:  "And  all  the 
people  sat  In  the  street — 3"im3 — of  the 
house  of  God,"  <tc.  Comp.  Neh.  viii.  1, 
3, 16.  The  reference  in  this  place,  there- 
fore, may  be  to  that  area  or  court ;  or  it 
may  be  to  any  place  of  concourse,  or  any 
thoroughfare.  It  is  such  language  as 
would  be  naturally  used  to  denote  that 
the  city  would  be  restored  to  its  former 
condition.  The  phrase  'shall  bo  built 
again,"  is,  in  the  margin,  return  and  be 
builded.  This  is  in  accordance  with  the 
Hebrew.  That  is,  it  would  be  restored  to 
its  former  state ;  it  would,  as  it  were, 
come  back,  and  be  built  up  again.  Heng- 
stenberg  renders  it,  '  a  street  is  restored 
and  built.'  The  phrase  properly  implies 
that  it  would  assume  its  former  condition, 
the  word  built  here  being  used  in  the 
sense  of  made,  as  we  speak  of  making  a 
road.  Lengerke  renders  it,  wird  wieder 
hergestellet — '  shall  be  again  restored.' 
Theodotion  renders  it,  iniarpcipei — '  It 
shall  return,'  understanding  it  as  mean- 
ing that  there  would  be  a  return,  to  wit, 
from  the  exile.  But  the  more  correct 
meaning,  undoubtedly,  is,  that  the  street 
would  return  to  its  former  state,  and  be 
rebuilt.  ^  And  the  wall.  Marg.,  ditch. 
Hengstenberg  renders  this,  '  and  firmly  is 
it  determined,'  maintaining  that  the  word 
ynrihere  means  fixed,  determined,  re- 
solved on,  and  that  the  idea  is,  that  the 
purpose  that  the  city  should  be  rebuilt  was 
firmly  resolved  on  in  the  divine  mind,  and 
that  the  dasign  of  what  is  here  said  was  to 
comfort  a!id  animate  the  returned  Hebrews 
in  their  efforts  to  rebuild  the  city,  in  all 
the  discouragements  and  troubles  which 
would  attend  such  an  undertaking.  The 
common  interpretation,  however,  has  been 
that  it  refers  to  a  ditch,  trench,  or  wall, 
that  would  be  constructed  at  the  time  of 
the  rebuilding  of  the  city.  So  the  Vul- 
gate, j(i!(r?',  walls.  So  Theodotion,  reTxoi 
— toall.  The  Syriac  renders  it,  'Jerusa- 
lem, and  the  villages,  and  the  streets.' 
Luther,  Mauren,  walls.  Lengerke  ren- 
ders it,  as  Hengstenberg  does,  'and  it  is 
determined.'  Maurer  understands  the  two 
expressions,  street  and  wall,  to  be  equiva- , 


lent  to  within  and  without — meaning  that 
the  city  would  be  thoroughly  and  en- 
tirely rebuilt.  The  Hebrew  word  ynn 
— means  properly  that  which  is  cut  in,  or 
dug  out,  from  yyr]  — to  cut  in.  The  word 
is  translated  sharp  pointed  things  in  Job 
xli.  30  ;  gold,  Jine  gold,  choice  gold,  in  Ps. 
Ixviii.  13,  Prov.  iii.  14,  viii.  10,  19,  xvi. 
16,  Zech.  ix.  3;  a  threshing  instnimeni, 
Isa.  xxviii.  27,  Amos  i.  3;  sharp  (refer- 
ing  to  a  threshing  instrument,)  Isa.  xli.  15, 
wall,  Dan.  ix.  25  ;  and  decision,  Joel  iii. 
14.  It  does  not  elsewhere  occur  in  the 
Scriptures.  The  notion  of  gold  as  con- 
nected with  the  word  is  probably  derived 
from  the  fact  of  its  being  dug  for,  or  eag- 
erly sought  by  men.  That  idea  is,  of 
course,  not  applicable  here.  Gesenius 
supposes  that  it  here  means  a  ditch  or 
trench  of  a  fortified  city.  This  seems  to 
me  to  be  the  probable  signification.  At 
all  events,  this  has  the  concurrence  of  the 
great  body  of  interpreters ;  and  this  ac- 
cords well  with  the  connection.  The 
word  does  not  properly  mean  wall,  and  it 
is  never  elsewhere  so  used.  It  need  not 
be  said  that  it  was  common,  if  not  uni- 
versal, in  walled  cities,  to  make  a  deep 
ditch  or  trench  around  them  to  prevent 
the  approach  of  an  enemy,  and  such  lan- 
guage would  naturally  be  employed  in 
speaking  of  the  rebuilding  of  a  city. 
Prof.  Stuart  renders  it,  "with  broad 
spaces  and  narrow  limits."  ^  Even  in 
troublous  times.  Marg.,  strait  of.  Hengs- 
tenberg, 'in  a  time  of  distress.'  Len- 
gerke, Im  Druck  der  Zeiten — "in  a  pres- 
sure of  times."  Vulg.  In  angustia  tem- 
2)orum.  Theodotion,  in  the  Septuagint, 
renders  it,  'And  these  times  shall  be 
emptied  out'  {Thompson) — /cat  iKKCuwSii]. 
aovrai  ol  Kaipoi.  The  proper  meaning  of 
the  Hebrew  word — pis — is  distress,  trou- 
ble, anguish,  and  the  reference  is,  doubt- 
less, to  times  that  would  be  characterized 
by  trouble,  perplexity  and  distress.  The 
allusion  is  clearly  to  the  rebuilding  of  the 
city,  and  the  use  of  this  language  would 
lead  us  to  anticipate  that  such  an  enter- 
prise would  meet  with  opposition  or  em- 
barrassment; that  there  would  bo  difii- 
culty  in  accomplishing  it;  that  the  work 
would  not  be  carried  on  easily,  and  that 
a  considerable  time  would  be  necessary  to 
finish  it. 

Having  gone  through  with  an  inves- 
tigation  of  tho  meaning  of  the  words 


DANIEL 


[B.  C.  538. 


and  phrases  of  this  verse,  we  are  now 
prepared  to  inquire  more  particularly 
what  things  are  referred  to,  and  whether 
the  predictions  have  been  fulfilled.  The 
points  which  it  is  necessary  to  examine 
are  the  following  : — To  whom  reference 
is  made  by  the  Messiah  the  Prince ;  the 
time  designated  by  the  going  forth  of  the 
commandment- — or  the  terminus  a  quo ; 
the  question  whether  the  whole  period 
extends  to  the  lirth  of  him  here  referred 
to  as  the  Messiah  the  Prince,  or  to  his 
assuming  the  office  or  appearing  as  such  ; 
the  time  embraced  in  the  first  seven 
weeks — and  the  fulfilment — or  the  ques- 
tion whether,  from  the  time  of  the  going 
forth  of  the  commandment  to  the  appear- 
ing of  the  Messiah,  the  period  of  the  four 
hundred  and  ninety  j-ears  can  be  fairly 
made  out.  These  are  evidently  important 
points,  and  it  need  not  be  said  that  a 
great  variety  of  opinions  has  prevailed  in 
regard  to  them,  and  that  they  are  attended 
with  no  little  difiiculty. 

I.  To  whom  reference  is  made  by  the 
Messiah  the  Prince.  In  the  exposition  of 
the  meaning  of  the  words,  we  have  seen 
that  there  is  nothing  in  the  language  itself 
to  determine  this.  It  is  applicable  to  any 
one  who  should  be  set  apart  as  a  ruler  or 
prince,  and  might  be  applied  to  Cj'rus,  to 
any  anointed  king,  or  to  him  who  is  pro- 
perly designated  now  as  the  Messiah — 
the  Lord  Jesus.  Comp.  Notes  on  Isa. 
xlv.  1.  It  is  unnecessary  to  show  that  a 
great  variety  of  opinion  has  been  enter- 
tained both  among  the  Jewish  Rabbins, 
and  among  Christian  commentators,  re- 
specting the  question  to  whom  this  refers. 
Among  the  Jews,  Jarchi  and  Jaicchidee 
supposed  tliat  it  referred  to  Cyrus ;  Ben 
Gersom,  and  others,  to  Zerubbabel ;  Aben 
Ezra  to  Nehemiah;  Rabbi  Azariah  to 
Artaxerxes.  Berth oldt,  Lengerke,  Mau- 
rer,  and  this  class  of  expositors  generally, 
suppose  that  the  reference  is  to  Cyrus,  who 
is  called  the  Messiah,  or  the  'Anointed,' 
in  Isa.  xlv.  1.  According  to  this  inter- 
pretation, it  is  supposed  that  the  refer- 
ence is  to  the  seventy  years  of  Jeremiah, 
and  that  the  meaning  is,  that  'seven 
weeks,'  or  forty-nine  years  would  elapse 
from  the  desolation  of  the  city  till  the 
titne  of  Cj'rus.  See  Maurer  in  loc.  Comp. 
also  Lengerke,  pp.  444,  445.  As  speci- 
mens of  the  views  entertained  by  those 
who  deny  the  reference  of  the  passage  to 
the  Messiah,  and  of  the  difficulties  and 
fcbsurdities  of  those  views,  we  may  notice 


those  of  Eichhorn  and  Bertholdt,  Eich- 
horn  maintains  that  the  numbers  referred 
to  are  round  numbers,  and  that  we  are 
not  to  expect  to  be  able  to  make  out  an 
e.xact  conformity  between  those  numbers 
and  the  events.  The  'commandment' 
mentioned  in  ver.  25,  he  supposes  refers 
to  the  order  of  Cyrus  to  restore  and  re- 
build the  city,  which  order  was  given, 
according  to  Usher,  A.  M.  3468.  From 
this  point  of  time  must  the  '  seven  weeks,' 
or  the  forty-nine  years,  be  reckoned  ;  but 
according  to  his  view,  the  reckoning  must 
be  'backwards  and  forwards;'  that  is,  it 
is  seven  weeks,  or  forty-nine  years,  back- 
tcard  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  is  here 
called  '  Messiah  the  prince,'  who  destroyed 
the  temple  and  city,  A.  M.  3416 — or  about 
fifty-two  years  before  the  going  forth  of 
the  edict  of  Cyrus.  From  that  time,  the 
reckoning  of  the  sixty-two  weeks  must  bo 
commenced.  But  again,  this  is  not  to  be 
computed  literally  from  the  time  of  Ne- 
buchadnezsar  ;  but  since  the  Jews,  in  ac- 
cordance with  Jeremiah  xxv.  11,  12, 
reckoned  seventy  years,  instead  of  the 
true  time,  the  point  from  which  the  esti- 
mate is  to  begin  is  the  fourth  year  of  the 
reign  of  Jehoiakim,  and  this  occurred,  ac- 
cording to  Usher,  A.  M.  3397.  Reckon- 
ing from  this  point  onward,  the  sixty- 
two  weeks,  or  434  years,  would  bring  us 
to  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
(A.  M.  3829).  At  the  end  of  the  sixty- 
two  weeks,  in  the  first  j'ear  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  the  high  priest,  Onias  III., 
(the  Messiah  of  ver.  20,)  was  displaced — 
'cut  oif' — nn;^ — and  Jason  was  ap- 
pointed in  his  place,  and  Menelaus  the 
year  after  removed  him.  Thus  Onias  had 
properly  no  successor,  <fec.,  <fec.  This  ab- 
surd opinion  Bertholdt  (p.  605,  acq.)  at- 
tempts to  set  aside — a  task  which  is  very 
easily  performed,  and  then  proposes  his 
own — an  hypothesis  not  less  absurd  and 
improbable.  According  to  his  theory 
(p.  613,  seq.),  the  seventy  years  have  in- 
deed a  historical  basis,  and  the  time  em- 
braced in  thciJi  extends  from  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar  to 
the  death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  It  is 
divided  into  three  periods  :  (a)  The  seven 
first  hebdomads  extend  from  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar  to 
king  Cyrus,  who  gave  the  exiles  permission 
to  return  to  their  land.  This  is  the  period 
during  which  Jerusalem  must  lie  waste 
(ver.  2) ;  and  after  the  clcse  of  this,  by  the 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER  IX, 


385 


favour  of  Cj-riis  (vcr.  25),  the  promise  of 
Jeremiah  (ver.  25  —  "^3"i  —  'command- 
ment') that  Jerusaleai  sliall  he  fulfilled, 
goes  forth,  (b)  The  following  sixty-two 
■weeks  ext^^nd  from  the  return  of  the  ex- 
iles to  the  beginning  of  the  troubles  and 
persecutions  under  Antiochus.  This  is 
the  period  of  the  rebuilding  of  Jerusalem 
(ver.  25).  (c)  The  last  period  of  one 
week,  extends  from  the  time  of  the  op- 
pressions and  wrongs  commenced  under 
Antiochus,  to  the  death  of  Antiochus. 
Soe  this  view  fully  explained  and  illus- 
trated in  Bertholdt,  ut  supra.  The  great 
mass  of  Christian  interpreters,  however, 
have  supposed  that  the  reference  is  to  the 
Messiah  properly  so  called — the  promised 
Saviour  of  the  world — the  Lord  Jesus. 
In  support  3f  this  opinion,  the  following 
considerations  maj^  be  suggested,  which 
seem  to  me  to  be  conclusive :  (1)  The  lan- 
guage itself  is  such  as  is  properly  appli- 
cable to  him,  and  such  as  would  naturally 
suggest  him.  It  is  true,  as  we  see  in  Isa. 
xlv.  1,  that  the  term  Messiah  mai/  be  ap- 
plied to  another,  as  it  is  there  to  Cyrus, 
(see  the  Notes  on  the  meaning  of  the  word 
in  that  place,  and  in  the  exposition  of 
this  verse,)  but  it  is  also  true  that  if  the 
term  stands  by  itself,  and  with  no  expla- 
nation, it  would  naturally  suggest  him 
who,  by  way  of  eminence,  is  known  as 
the  Messiah.  In  Isa.  .\lv.  1,  it  is  ex- 
pressly limited  to  Cyrus,  and  there  can 
be  no  danger  of  mistake.  Here  there  is 
no  such  limitatior  and  it  is  natural, 
therefore,  to  apply  it  in  the  sense  in 
which  among  the  Hebrews  it  would  be 
obviously  understood.  Even  Bertholdt 
admits  the  force  of  this.  Thus  (p.  563) 
he  says  :  'That  at  the  words  nvn  n-U'D  — 
[Messiah  the  prince]  we  should  be  led  to 
think  of  the  Messiah,  Jesus,  and  at  those, 
ver.  26,  iS  iiNi  niU'u  ni:!'  [shall  be  cut 
off  but  not  for  himself],  of  his  crucifix- 
ion, though  not  absolutely  necessary,  is 
still  very  natural.'  (2)  This  would  be 
the  interpretation  which  would  be  given 
to  the  words  by  the  Jews.  They  were  so 
much  accustomed  to  look  forward  to  a] 
great  prince  and  deliverer,  who  would  be  I 
by  way  of  eminence,  the  anointed  of  the  ' 
Lord,  that,  unless  there  was  some  special 
limitation,  or  designation  in  the  language,  j 
they  would  naturally  apply  it  to  the  Mes-  j 
siah,  properly  so  called.  Couip.  Isa.  ix. 
C,  7.  Early  in  the  history  of  the  Jews, 
Iho  nation  had  become  accustomed  to  the  | 
3.3 


expectation  that  such  a  deliverer  would 
come,  and  its  hopes  were  centered  on 
him.  In  all  times  of  national  trouble  and 
calamity  ;  in  all  their  brightest  visions 
of  the  future,  they  were  accustomed  to 
look  to  him  as  one  who  would  deliver 
them  from  their  troubles,  and  who  would 
exalt  their  people  to  a  pitch  of  glory  and 
of  honour,  such  as  thej'  had  never  known 
bef n-e.  Unless,  therefore,  there  was  some- 
thing in  the  connection,  which  would  de- 
mand a  different  interpretation,  the  lan- 
guage woui^d  be  of  course  applied  to  the 
Messiah.  But  it  cannot  be  pretended  that 
there  is  any  thing  in  the  connection  that  de- 
mands such  a  limitation,  nor  which  forbids 
such  an  application.  (3)  So  far  as  the  an- 
cient versions  throw  any  light  on  the  sub- 
ject, they  show  that  this  is  the  correct  inter- 
pretation. So  the  Latin  Vulgate,  usque  ad 
Chrislum  ducem.  So  the  Syriac,  'unto 
Messiah,  the  most  holy' — literally,  'holt/ 
of  holies.'  So  Theodotion — twf  xcorou — 
where  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the 
Messi.ah  was  understood  to  be  referred 
to.  The  same  is  found  in  the  Arabic. 
The  Codex  Chis.  is  in  utter  confusion  on 
this  whole  passage,  and  nothing  can  bo 
made  of  it.  (4)  AH  the  circumstances 
referred  to  in  connection  with  him  who 
is  here  called  'Messiah  the  prince,' are 
such  as  to  be  properly  applicable  to  the 
work  which  the  Lord  Jesus  came  to  do, 
and  not  to  Cj-rus,  or  Antiochus,  or  any 
other  leader  or  ruler.  See  the  Notes  on 
ver.  25.  To  no  other  one,  according  to 
the  interpretation  which  the  passage  in 
that  verse  seems  to  demand,  can  the  ex- 
pressions there  used  be  applied.  In  that 
exposition  it  was  shown  that  the  verse  is 
designed  to  give  a  general  view  of  what 
would  be  accomplished,  or  of  what  is  ex- 
pressed more  in  detail  in  the  remaining 
verses  of  the  vision,  and  that  the  lan- 
guage there  used  can  be  applied  properly 
to  the  work  which  the  Lord  Jesus  came 
to  accomplish.  Assuredly  to  no  one  elso 
can  the  phrases  '  to  restrain  transgres- 
sion,' '  to  seal  up  sins,'  '  to  cover  over 
iniquity,'  'to  bring  in  everlasting  righte- 
ousness,' 'to  seal  up  the  vision  and  pro- 
phecy,' and  'to  consecrate  the  most  holy 
place/  be  so  well  applied.  The  same  is 
true  of  the  language  in  the  subsequent 
part  of  the  prophecy,  'Messiah  shall  be 
cutoff,'  'not  for  himself,'  'shall  confirm 
the  covenant,'  '  cause  the  oblation  to 
cease.'  Any  one  may  see  the  perplexi- 
ties in  which  they  are  involved  by  adopt- 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  63^ 


ing  another  interpretation,  by  consulting  ] 
Bertholdt  or  Lengerke  on  the  passage. 

(5)  The  expression  here  used — •prince' — 
•\\3) — is  applied  to  the  Messiah — beyond 
all  question  in  Isa.  Iv.  4  :  "  I  have  given 
him  for  a  witness  to  the  people,  a  leader — 
•\>3) — and  a  commander  to  the  people." 

(6)  The  perplexity  attending  any  other 
interpretation  is  an  additional  proof  of 
this  point.  In  full  illustration  of  this,  it  is 
necessary  only  to  refer  to  the  views  of  Ber- 
tholdt  and  Eichhorn  as  above  exhibited. 
Whatever  may  be  said  about  the  difficul- 
ties on  the  supposition  that  it  refers  to 
the  Lord  Jesus — the  true  Messiah,  no 
one  can  undertake  to  reconcile  the  appli- 
cations which  they  have  proposed  with 
any  belief  of  the  inspiration  of  the  pas- 
sage. These  considerations  seem  to  me 
to  make  it  clear  that  the  prophecy  had 
reference  to  the  Messiah  properly  so 
called — the  hope  and  the  expectation  of 
the  Jewish  people.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  Daniel  would  so  understand 
it;  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  would 
be  so  applied  by  the  Jews. 

II.  The  next  question  is,  From  what 
point  are  we  to  reckon  in  computing  the 
time  when  the  Messiah  would  appear — 
the  terminus  a  quo  f  It  is  important  to 
fix  this,  for  the  whole  question  of  the 
fulfilment  depends  on  it,  and  hoiiesti/  re- 
quires that  it  should  be  determined  with- 
out reference  to  the  time  to  which  four 
hundred  and  ninety  years  would  reach — 
or  the  terminus  ad  quent.  It  is  clearly 
not  proper  to  do  as  Prideaux  does,  to  as- 
sume that  it  refers  to  the  birth  of  Christ, 
and  then  to  reckon  backward  to  a  time 
which  may  be  made  to  mean  the  'going 
forth  of  the  commandment.'  The  true 
method,  undoubtedly,  would  be  to  fix  on  a 
time  which  would  accord  with  the  expres- 
sion here,  with  no  reference  to  the  question 
of  the  fulfilment — for  in  that  way  only  can 
it  be  determined  to  be  a  irun prophecy,  and 
in  that  way  only  would  it  be  of  any  use 
to  Daniel,  or  to  those  who  succeeded  him. 
It  need  hardly  be  said,  that  a  great 
variety  of  opinions  have  been  mentioned 
in  regard  to  the  time  designated  by  the 
'  going  forth  of  the  commandment.'  Ber- 
tholdt  (pp.  567,  568),  mentions  no  less 
than  thirteen  opinions  which  have  been  en- 
tertained on  this  point,  and  in  such  a  va- 
riety of  sentiment,  it  seems  almost  hope- 
less to  be  able  to  ascertain  the  truth  with 
»ertainty.    Now,  in  determining  this,  there 


are  a  few  points  which  may  be  regarded 
as  certain.  They  are  such  as  these : 
(a)  That  the  commandment  referred  to  ia 
one  that  is  issued  by  some  prince  or  king 
having  authority,  and  not  the  purpose 
of  God.  Sec  Notes  above  on  the  first 
part  of  the  verse.  (6)  That  the  distinct 
command  would  be  to  'restore  and  build 
Jerusalem.'  This  is  specified,  and  there- 
fore would  seem  to  be  distinguished  from 
a  command  to  build  the  temple,  or  to  re- 
store that  from  its  state  of  ruin.  It  is 
true  that  the  one  might  appear  to  be  im- 
plied in  the  other,  and  yet  this  does  not 
necessarily  follow.  For  various  causes 
it  might  be  permitted  to  the  Jews  to 
rebuild  their  temjAe,  and  there  might  be 
a  royal  ordinance  commanding  that, 
while  there  was  no  purpose  to  restore  the 
city  to  its  former  power  and  splendor, 
and  even  while  there  might  be  strong  ob- 
jections to  it.  For  the  use  of  the  Jews 
who  still  resided  in  Palestine,  and  lor 
those  who  were  about  to  return,  it  might 
be  a  matter  of  policy  to  permit  them  to 
rebuild  their  temple,  and  even  to  aid 
them  in  it,  while  yet  it  might  be  regarded 
as  perilous  to  allow  them  to  rebuild  the 
city,  and  to  place  it  in  its  former  condition 
of  strength  and  power;  It  was  a  place 
easily  fortified;  it  had  cost  the  Baby- 
lonian monarch  much  time,  and  had  oc- 
casioned them  many  losses,  before  they 
had  been  able  to  conquer  and  subdue  it, 
and,  even  to  Cyrus,  it  might  be  a  matter 
of  very  questionable  policy  to  allow  it  te 
be  built  and  fortified  again.  Accordingly 
we  find  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  per- 
mission to  rebuild  the  temple,  and  the 
permission  to  rebuild  the  city,  were  quite 
different  things,  and  were  separately 
granted  by  different  sovereigns,  and  that 
the  work  was  executed  by  different  per- 
sons. The  former  might,  without  im- 
propriety, be  regarded  as  the  close  of  the 
captivity — or  the  end  of  the  'seventy 
years'  of  Jeremiah — for  a  permission  to 
rebuild  the  temple  was,  in  fact,  a  permis- 
sion to  return  to  their  own  country,  and 
an  implied  purpose  to  aid  them  in  it,  while 
a  considerable  interval  might,  and  perhaps 
probably  would  elapse,  before  a  distinct 
command  was  issued  to  restore  and  re- 
build the  city  itself,  and  even  then  a  long 
period  might  intervene  before  it  would 
be  completed.  Accordingly,  in  the  edict 
published  by  Cyrus,  the  permission  to 
rebuild  the  temple  is  the  one  that  is  care- 
fully specified  :  "  Thus  saith  Cyrus,  king 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER   IX. 


889 


of  Persia,  The  Lord  God  of  heaven  hath 
given  me  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth  ; 
and  he  hath  charged  mo  to  build  him  an 
house  at  Jerusalem,  which  is  in  Judah. 
Who  is  there  among  you  of  all  his  peo- 
ple ?  Ilis  God  be  with  him,  and  let  him 
go  up  to  Jerusalem,  which  is  in  Judah, 
and  build  the  hou^e  of  the  Lord  G)d  of 
Israel  (he  is  the  God),  which  is  at  Jeru- 
salem," Ezra  i.  2,  3.  In  this  order 
there  is  nothing  said  of  the  restoration 
of  the  citij,  and  that  in  fact  occurred  at  a 
different  time,  and  under  the  direction 
of  different  leaders.  The  first  enterprise 
was  to  rebuild  the  temple ;  it  was  still  a 
question  whether  it  would  he  a  matter 
of  policy  to  allow  the  city  to  be  rebuilt, 
and  that  was  in  fact  accomplished  at  a 
different  time.  These  considerations 
eeem  to  make  it  certain  that  the  edict  re- 
ferred to  here  was  not  that  which  was 
issued  by  Cijrm,  but  must  have  been  a 
subsequent  decree  bearing  particularly 
on  the  rebuilding  of  the  city  itself.  It  is 
true  that  the  command  to  rebuild  </te  tem- 
ple  would  imply  that  either  there  were 
persons  residing  amidst  the  ruins  of 
Jerusalem,  or  in  the  land  of  Palestine, 
who  were  to  worship  there,  and  that  there 
would  be  inhabitants  in  Jerusalem,  pro- 
babl}'  those  who  would  go  from  Babylon — 
for  otherwise  the  temple  would  be  of  no 
service,  but  still  this  might  be,  and  there 
be  no  permission  to  rebuild  the  city  with 
any  degree  of  its  ancient  strength  and 
splendor,  and  none  to  surround  it  rvith 
walls — a  very  material  thing  in  the  struc- 
ture of  an  ancient  city,  (c)  This  inter- 
pretation is  confirmed  by  the  latter  part 
of  the  verse :  '  the  street  shall  be  built 
again,  and  the  wall,  even  in  troublous 
times.'  If  the  word  rended  icall,  means 
trench  or  ditch,  as  I  have  supposed,  still 
it  was  a  trench  or  ditch  which  was  de- 
signed as  a  defence  of  a  city,  or  which 
was  excavated  bj'  making  a  wall,  or  for 
the  purpose  of  i'ortifying  a  walled  city  in 
order  to  make  it  stronger,  and  the  ex- 
pression is  one  which  would  not  be  ap- 
plied to  the  mere  purpose  of  rebuilding  the 
temple,  nor  would  it  be  used  except  in  a 
command  to  restore  the  city  itself.  AYe 
are,  then,  in  the  fair  interpretation  of 
the  passage  required  now,  to  show  that 
Buch  a  command  went  forth  from  the 
Persian  king  to  '  restore  and  rebuild'  the 
city  itself — that  is,  a  permission  to  put  it 
into  such  a  condition  of  strength,  as  it 
vas  before. 


In  order  to  see  how  this  interpretation 
accords  with  the  facts  in  the  case,  and  to 
determine  whether  such  a  period  can  bo 
found  ai  shall  properly  correspond  with 
this  interpretation,  and  enable  us  to  as- 
certain the  point  of  time  here  referred 
to — the  terminus  a  quo — it  is  proper  to  in- 
quire what  are  the  facts  which  history  has 
preserved.  For  this  purpose,  I  looked 
at  this  point  of  the  investigation  into 
Jahn's  'Hebrew  Commonwealth,'  (pp.  IGO 
— 177),  a  work  not  written  with  any  re- 
ference to  the  fulfilment  of  this  prophecy, 
and  which,  indeed,  in  the  portion  relat- 
ing to  this  period  of  the  world,  makes  no 
allusion  whatever  to  Daniel.  The  in- 
quiry which  it  was  necessary  to  settle 
was,  whether  under  any  of  the  Persian 
kings  there  was  any  order  or  command 
which  would  properly  correspond  with 
what  we  have  ascertained  to  be  the  fair 
meaning  of  the  passage.  A  very  brief 
synopsis  of  the  principal  events  recorded 
by  Jahn  as  bearing  on  the  restoration  of 
the  Jews  to  their  own  country,  will  be 
all  that  is  needful  to  add  to  determine 
the  question  before  us. 

The  kings  of  the  Persian  universal 
monarchy,  according  to  Ptolemy,  were 
ten,  and  the  whole  sum  of  their  reign 
two  hundred  and  seven  years — from  the 
time  of  Cyaxares  II.,  to  the  time  of  Al- 
exander the  Great.  But  Ptolemy's  spe- 
cific object  being  chronology,  he  omitted 
those  who  continued  not  on  the  throne  a 
full  year,  and  referred  the  months  of  their 
reign,  partly  to  the  preceding,  and  partly 
to  the  succeeding  monarch.  The  whole 
number  of  sovereigns  was  in  reality  four- 
teen, as  appears  by  the  following  table  : 


B.  C 

1/S. 

moe 

538. 

Cyaxares  II.         reigned 

2 

536. 

Cyrus                          " 

7 

629. 

Cambyses                   " 

7 

5 

522. 

Smerdis                      " 

7 

521. 

Darius  Ilystaspis      " 

36 

4S5. 

Xerxes  I.                  " 

21 

4G4. 

Artaxerxes  Longimanus 

40 

3 

424. 

Xerxes  II.                 " 

2 

424. 

Sogdianus                  " 

7 

423. 

Darius  Nothus          '' 

19 

404. 

Artaxerxes  Mnemon 

46 

358. 

Darius  Ochus             " 

21 

337. 

Arses                         " 

2 

335. 

Darius  Codomanus  " 

4 

Under  the  reign  of  this  last  prince, 
B.  C.  331,  the  kingdom  was  entirely  suIk 
dued  by  Alexander  the  Great. 


383 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538. 


Id  i'ct)iOi',it  to  the  question  ■whether  any 
■>rdor  ur  toii.aiand  >Yns  issued  pertaining 
to  thj  lelullding  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem 
that  cirresponds  with  the  meaning  of  the 
prediction  as  above  explained,  the  fol- 
lowing facts  will  probably  furnish  all  the 
knowledge  whioh  can  be  obtained  : 

(o)  Cijiixarco  II.  Of  course  there  was 
nothing  in  the  lirae  of  Cyaxares  II.,  the 
Darius  of  Daniol  (vi.  1 ;  ix.  1),  as  it  was 
under  him  that  Babylon  was  conquered, 
and  there  was  no  movement  towards  a 
restoration  of  tho  Jews  to  their  own  land 
commenced  by  bim,  the  first  movement 
of  that  kind  beirg  under  Cyrus. 

(h)  CijruK.  What  was  the  nature  of  the 
order  issued  by  him  we  have  seen  above. 
It  was  a  command  to  build  the  temple  and 
was  limited  to  that,  and  involved  no  ref- 
erence to  the  city.  The  command  as  we 
have  seen  above,  did  not  extend  to  that, 
and  there  were  probably  good  reasons 
why  it  was  not  contemplated  that  it 
should  be  rebuilt  in  its  former  strength, 
and  fortified  as  it  was  before.  The  pur- 
pose to  fortify  the  city,  or  to  encomjiass 
it  by  a  wall  or  ditch,  or  even  to  build  it 
at  all,  could  not  have  been  brought  with- 
in the  order  of  Cyrus,  as  recorded  in 
Ezra,  and  that  is  the  only  form  of  the 
order  which  we  have.  The  language  of 
Daniel,  therefore,  seems  to  have  been 
chosen  of  design  when  he  says  that  the 
command  would  be  issued  to  rebuild  the 
citij,  not  the  tewple.  At  any  rate,  such  is 
the  language,  and  such  was  not  the  order 
of  Cyrus. 

(c)  Camht/ses.  After  the  death  of  Cy- 
rus, the  Samaritans  wrote  to  Cambyses 
(called  by  Ezra,  Ahasu^rus)  against  the 
Jews.  We  are  not  informed  what  effect 
this  letter  produced,  but  we  can  easily 
judge  from  the  character  of  this  degene- 
rate son  of  Cyrus,  as  it  is  represented  in 
history.  He  was  a  "  thoughtless,  glutton- 
ous, furious  warrior,  who  was  considered 
as  raving  mad  even  by  liis  own  subjects." 
John,  lie  madly  invaded  Egypt,  and 
on  his  return  learned  that  Smerdis,  his 
brother,  had  usurped  the  throne  in  his 
absence,  and  died  of  a  wound  received 
from  the  falling  of  his  sword  from  its 
eheath,  aa  he  was  mounting  his  horse. 
No  order  is  mentioned  during  his  reign 
pertaining  to  the  rebuilding  either  of  the 
city  or  the  temple. 

(d)  Smerdis.  He  retained  the  throne 
about  seven  months.  In  the  Bible  he  has 
Ibc  name  of  Artaserxes.     Comp.,respect- 


|ing  him,  Ctesias  x ;  Justin  i.  9;  Herod. 
iii.  61 — 07.  "  To  this  monarch  the  Sama. 
ritans  again   addressed  themselves,  com- 

1  plaining  that  the  Jews  were  building 
(that  is,  foiti/yiiig)  the  city  of  Jerusalem, 

j  which  they  had  never  thought  of  d<jing; 

t  and  in  consequence  of  this  false  accusa- 
tion, Smerdis  issued  a  positive  prohibition 
of  their  work."    Jahn.  Two  things,  there- 

I  fore,  may  be  remarked  respecting  this 
reign:  (1)  The  order  or  commandment 
referred  to  by  Daniel  could  not  have  been 

j  issued  during  this  reign,  since  there  was 
an  express  'prohibition'  against  the  work 
of  building  and  fortifying  the  city;  and 
(2)    This    confirms   what   is    said   above 

i  about  the  improbability  that  any  order 
would  have  been  issued  by  Cyrus  to  re- 
build and  fortify  the  city  itself.  It  could 
not  but  have  been  foreseen  that  such  an 

I  order  would  be  likely  to  excite  opposition 

'  from  the  Samaritans,  and  to  cause  inter- 
nal dissensions  and  difficulties  in  Pales- 

I  tine,  and  it  is  not  probable  that  the  Per- 
sian government  would  allow  the  rebuild- 
ing of  a  city  that  would  lead  to  such  col- 
lisions. 

j  {e)  Daniel  Hysfaspis.  He  reigned  thirty- 
six  years.     He  was  a  mild  and  benevolent 

j  ruler.  "  As  Smerdis  was  a  mere  usurper, 
his  prohibition  of  rebuilding  the  temple 
was  of  no  authority."  Jahn.  In  the 
second  year  of  his  reign,  Haggai  and 
Zechariah  appeared,  who  plied  the  gov- 

j  ernor,  Zerubbabel,  the  high  priest  Joshua, 
and  the  whole  people,  with  such  powerful 
appeals  to  the  divine  commands,  that  the 
building  of  the  house  of  God  was  once 
more  resumed.  Upon  this  Tatnai,  the 
Persian  governor  on  the  west  side  of  the 
Euphrates,  came  with  his  ofiicers  to  call 
the  Jews  to  an  account,  who  referred  him 
to  the  permission  of  Cyrus,  and  the  Jews 
were  suffered  to  proceed.  The  whole 
matter  was,  however,  made  known  to 
Darius,  and  he  caused  search  to  be  made 
among  the  archives  of  the  State  in  refer- 
ence to  the  alleged  decree  of  Cj'rus.  The 
edict  of  Cyrus  was  found  which  directed 
that  a  temple  should  be  built  at  Jerusa- 
lem at  the  royal  expense,  and  of  much 
larger  dimensions  than  the  former.  A 
copy  of  this  was  sent  to  Tatnai,  and  he 
was  commanded  to  see  that  the  work 
should  be  forwarded,  and  that  the  ex- 
penses should  be  defrayed  from  the  royal 
treasury,  and  that  the  priests  should  bo 
supplied  with  whatever  was  necessary  to 
keep   up   the  daily  sacrifice.     The  work 


B.  C.  -38.] 


CHAPTER    IX. 


389 


jvas,  therefore,  pressed  on  with  renewed 
vifjour.  and  in  the  sixth  year  of  his  reign 
thetoiiipIoiv;is  completed  and  consecrated. 
The  remainder  of  his  reip;n  ivas  spent  in 
unnecessary  wars  with  Scythia,  Thrace, 
Indin,  and  Greece,  lie  suffered  an  over- 
throu  al;  Marathon,  and  was  preparing 
for  a  more  energetic  campaign  in  Greece 
when  he  died,  and  left  his  dominion  and 
his  wars  to  Xerxes.  No  order  was  issued 
during  his  reign  for  the  rebuilding  of  the 
city  of  Jerusalem.  All  his  edicts  pertain 
to  the  original  grant  of  Cyrus — the  per- 
mission to  build  the  temple, 

(/)  Xerxes  I.  The  career  of  Xerxes 
is  well  known.  He  was  distinguished  for 
gluttony,  voluptuousness,  and  cruelty.  He 
is  celebrated  for  his  invasion  of  Greece, 
for  the  check  which  he  met  at  Ther- 
mopylai,  and  for  the  overthrow  of  his 
naval  forces  at  Salamis  by  Theraistocles. 
In  the  twenty-first  year  of  his  reign  he 
was  murdered  by  Artabanus,  commander 
of  his  life-guard.  He  died  in  the  year 
464:  B.  C.  According  to  Jahn,  it  is  pro- 
bable that  "the  Artaxer.xes  of  Ezra,  who 
is  mentioned  next  after  Darius  Ilys- 
taspis,  and  the  Ahasuerus  of  Esther,  are 
names  of  Xerxes  I."  If  so,  it  was  under 
him  that  the  second  caravan  of  Jews  went 
to  Judea,  under  the  direction  of  Ezra. 
Ezra  vii.  Xerxes,  if  he  was  the  prince 
referred  to,  gave  Ezra  an  ample  commis- 
sion in  regard  to  the  temple  at  Jerusalem, 
granting  him  full  power  to  do  all  that  was 
necessary  to  maintain  public  worship 
there,  and  committing  to  him  the  vessels 
of  gold  and  silver  in  Eab.ylon  pertaining 
to  the  temple,  &q.  The  decree  may  be 
fovind  in  Ezra  vii.  13 — 20.  This  decree, 
however,  relates  wholly  to  the  temple — 
the  'house  of  God.'  There  was  no  order 
for  rebuilding  the-city,  and  there  is  no 
evidence  that  any  thing  material  was 
done  ill  building  the  city,  or  the  walls. 
Respecting  this  reign,  Jahn  remarks, 
''  The  Hebrew  colony  in  Judea  seem  never 
to  have  been  in  a.  very  flourishing  condi- 
tion. The  administration  of  justice  was 
particularly  defective,  and  neither  civil 
niir  religious  institutions  were  firmly  es- 
tablished. Accordingly  the  king  gave 
permission  anew  for  all  Hebrews  to  emi- 
grate to  Judea."  p.  172.  Ezra  made  the 
journey  with  the  caravan  in  three  months; 
deposited  the  precious  gifts  in  the  temple, 
caused  the  Scriptures  to  be  read  and  ex- 
plained; commenciid  amoral  reformation, 
but  did  nothing,  sc  far  as  appears,  in  re- 
33  » 


constructing  the  city — for  his  commission 
did  not  extend  to  that. 

(7)  Avtaxer.ves  Loiigi'iDoiuin.  Accord- 
ing to  Jahn,  he  began  to  reign  B.  C.  4C1, 
and  reigned  fort}' jears  and  three  months. 
It  was  during  his  reign  that  Nehomiah 
lived,  and  that  he  acted  as  governor  of 
Judea.  The  colony  in  Judea,  says  Jahn, 
which  had  been  so  flourishing  in  the  tinio 
of  Ezra,  had  greatly  declined,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  fact  that  Syria  and  Phe-- 
nicia  had  been  the  rendezvous  of  the  ar- 
mies of  Artaxerxes.  "Nehemiah,  the 
cup-bearer  of  Artaxerxes,  learned  the  un- 
happy state  of  the  Hebrews,  B.  C.  444, 
from  a  certain  Jew  named  llanani,  who 
had  come  from  Judea  to  Shushan  with  n 
caravan.  Of  the  regulations  introduced 
by  Ezra  478  B.  C.  there  was  little  re- 
maining, and,  amid  the  confusions  of 
war,  the  condition  of  the  Jews  continu- 
all}'  grew  worse.  This  information  so 
afflicted  Nehemiah  that  the  king  observed 
his  melancholj',  and  inquiring  its  cause 
he  appointed  him  governor  oi  Judea,  10 iih 
full  potoer  to  fuvtifjj  Jerusalem  aud  thus 
to  secure  it  from  the  disasters  to  which 
unprotected  places  are  always  exposed  iu 
time  of  war.  Orders  were  sent  to  the 
royal  oflicers  west  of  the  Euphrates  to  as- 
si'st  in  the  fortification  of  the  city,  and  to 
furnish  the  requisite  timber  from  the 
king's  forest;  probably  on  Mount  Libanus, 
near  the  sources  of  the  river  Kadisha,  as 
that  was  the  place  celebrated  for  its  ce- 
dars. Thus  commissioned,  Nehemiah 
journeyed  to  Judea,  accompanied  by  mil- 
itary officers  and  cavalry."  pp.  17o,  176. 
Jahn  further  adds,  "as  soon  as  Nehe- 
miah, on  his  arrival  in  Palestine,  had 
been  acknowledged  governor  of  Judea  by 
the  royal  officcj-s,  he  made  known  his  pre- 
parations for  fortifying  Jerusalem  to  the 
elders  who  composed  the  Jewish  council. 
All  the  heads  of  houses,  and  the  high 
priest  Eliashib,  engaged  zealously  in  the 
work.  The  chiefs  of  the  Samaritans, 
Sanballet,  Tobiah  and  Geshem,  endea- 
voured to  thwart  their  undertaking  by 
insnlts,  by  malicious  insinuations  that  it 
was  a  preparation  for  revidt,  by  plots,  and 
by  preparations  for  a  hostile  attack.  The 
Jews,  notwithstanding,  proceeded  earn- 
estly in  their  business,  armed  the  I.1- 
bourers,  protected  them  still  further  by  a 
guard  of  armed  citizens,  and  at  length 
happily  completed  the  walls  of  their  city." 
We  have  reached  a  point,  then,  in  the 
history  of  the  kings  of  Persia,  when  thera 


390 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  538. 


was  a  distii/ct  order  to  restore  and  fortify 
Jerusalem,  and  when  there  was  an  ex- 
press expedition  undertaken  to  accom- 
plish this  result.  In  the  history  of  these 
kings,  as  reported  hy  Jahn,  this  is  the 
first  order  that  would  seem  to  compre- 
hend with  the  language  of  Daniel — '  the 
commandment  to  restore  and  rebuild  Je- 
rusalem,' and  the  assertion  that  '  the 
street  should  be  built  again,  and  the  wall, 
even  in  troublous  times.'  It  may  be  well, 
therefore,  to  pause  here,  and  to  look  more 
distinctly  at  this  order  of  Ataxerxes  Lon- 
gimanus,  and  inquire  into  its  conformity 
with  the  language  of  Daniel.  The  cir- 
cumstances, then,  as  stated  in  the  book  of 
Nehemiah,  are  these :  {a)  Nehemiah 
learned  from  Hanani  the  state  of  his 
brethren  in  Judea,  and  the  fact  that  the 
''walls  of  the  city  were  broken  down,  and 
,hat  the  gates  were  burned  with  fire," 
and  that  the  people  who  were  at  Jerusa- 
lem were  in  a  state  of  "great  affliction 
and  reproach,"  and  gave  himself  to  weep- 
ing, and  fasting,  and  prayer,  on  that  ac- 
count. Neh.  i.  (i)  On  coming  into  the 
presence  of  Artaxerxes,  to  perform  the 
usual  duty  of  presenting  the  wine  of  the 
king,  the  king  saw  the  sadness  and  dis- 
tress of  Nehemiah,  and  inquired  the 
cause.  Neb.  ii.  1,  2.  This,  Nehemiah 
(ii.  ])  is  careful  to  remark,  occurred  in 
the  twentieth  year  of  his  reign,  (c)  He 
states  distinctly,  that  it  was  because  Je- 
rusalem was  still  in  ruins  :  "  Why  should 
not  my  countenance  be  sad,  when  the 
citij,  the  place  of  my  fathers'  sepulchres, 
lieth  waste,  and  the  gates  thereof  are  con- 
sumed with  fire."  ch.  ii.  3.  (d)  The  re- 
quest of  Nehemiah,  in  accordance  with 
the  language  in  Daniel,  was,  that  be 
might  be  permitted  to  go  to  Jerusalem 
and  rebuild  the  citij  :  "And  he  said  unto 
the  king,  if  it  please  the  king,  and  if  thy 
servant  have  found  favour  in  thy  sight, 
that  thou  wouldst  send  me  imto  Judah, 
unto  the  city  of  vuj  fathers'  sepulchre, 
that  I  may  build  it."  ch.  ii.  5.  (e)  The 
edict  of  Artaxerxes  contemplated  the 
Eamo  thing  which  is  foretold  by  the  angel 
to  Daniel :  "And  a  letter  unto  Asaph,  the 
keeper  of  the  king's  forest,  that  he  may 
give  me  timber  to  make  beams  for  the 
gates  for  the  palace  which  appertained  to 
the  gates  of  the  house,  a.nd  for  the  wall  of 
the  city,"  &.C.  ch.  ii.  8.  { /)  The  work 
which  Nehemiah  did,  under  this  edict, 
was  that  which  is  supposed  in  thepredic- 
fion  in  Daniel.     Hit-  first  work  was  to  go 


forth  by  night  to  survey  the  state  of  th* 
city.  "  And  I  went  out  by  night,  by  the 
gate  of  the  valley,  &c.,  and  viewed  the 
walls  of  Jerusalem  which  were  broken 
down,  and  the  gates  thereof  were  con- 
sumed by  fire."  ch.  ii.  13.  His  next 
work  was  to  propose  to  rebuild  these 
walls  again  :  "  Then  said  I  unto  them, 
Ye  see  the  distress  that  we  are  in,  how 
Jerusalem  lieth  waste ;  and  the  gates 
thereof  are  burned  with  fire ;  come  and 
let  us  build  up  the  wall  of  Jerusalem, 
that  we  be  no  more  a  reproach,"  ver.  17. 
The  next  work  was  to  rebuild  those  walls, 
a  full  description  of  which  we  have  in  the 
third  chapter  of  Nehemiah,  vs.  1 — 32,  and 
in  ch.  iv.  1 — 23.  The  city  was  thus  lor- 
tified.  It  was  built  again  according  to 
the  purpose  of  Nehemiah,  and  according 
to  the  decree  of  Artaxerxes.  It  took  its 
place  again  as  a  fortified  city,  and  the 
promised  work  of  restoring  and  rebuild- 
ing it  was  complete,  (g)  The  building  of 
the  city  and  the  walls  under  Nehemiah, 
occurred  in  just  such  circumstances  as 
are  predicted  by  Daniel.  The  angel  says  : 
"  The  wall  shall  be  built  again,  even  in 
troublous  times."  Let  any  one  read  the 
account  of  the  rebuilding  in  Nehemiah — 
the  description  of  the  *  troubles'  which 
were  produced  by  the  opposition  of  San- 
ballat  and  those  associated  with  him  (Neh. 
iv.),  and  he  will  see  the  striking  accuracy 
of  this  expression — an  accuracy  as  entire 
as  if  it  had  been  employed  after  the  event 
in  describing  it,  instead  of  having  been 
used  before  in  predicting  it. 

It  may  confirm  this  interpretation  to 
make  three  remarks :  (1)  After  this  de- 
cree of  Artaxerxes  there  was  no  order  is- 
sued by  Persian  kings  pertaining  to  the 
restoration  and  rebuilding  of  the  city. 
Neither  Xerxes  II.,  nor  Sogdianus,  nor 
Darius  Nothus,  nor  Artaxerxes  Mnemon, 
nor  Darius  Ochus,  nor  Arsos,  nor  Darius 
Codomanus,  issued  any  decree  that  cor- 
responded at  all  with  this  prediction,  or 
any  that  related  to  the  rebuilding  of  Je- 
rusalem. There  was  no  occasion  for  anj', 
for  the  work  was  done.  (2)  A  second 
remark  is,  that,  in  the  language  of  Ileng- 
stenberg  :  "  Until  the  twentieth  year  of 
Artaxerxes,  the  new  city  of  Jerusalem 
was  an  open,  thinly  inhabited  village, 
exposed  to  all  aggressions  from  its  neigh- 
bours, sustaining  the  same  relation  to  the 
former  and  the  latter  city,  as  the  huts 
erected  after  the  burning  of  a  city  for  the 
first  prostration  from  rain  and  wind,  do 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER   IX. 


391 


to  those  which  aro  still  uninjured,  or 
which  have  been  rebuilt."  Chris,  ii.  381. 
This  is  quite  apparent  from  the  remarHs 
which  have  been  already  made  respecting 
the  state  of  the  citj'.  The  want  of  any  per- 
mission to  rebuild  tho  city  and  the  walls; 
the  fact  that  the  permission  to  return  ex- 
tended only  to  a  right  to  rebuild  the 
temple  ;  the  improbabilities  above  stated 
that  the  rebuilding  of  tho  city  in  its 
strength  would  be  allowed  when  they  first 
returned,  and  no  account  which  Nehemiah 
gives  of  the  condition  of  Jerusalem  at  the 
time  when  he  asked  leave  to  go  and  *  build' 
it,  all  tend  to  confirm  this  supposition.  See 
Hengstenberg,  as  above,  pp.  381 — 386. 
(3)  A  third  remark  is,  that  a  confirmation 
of  this  may  be  found  in  the  Book  of  Ec- 
clesiasticus,  showing  how  Nehemiah  was 
regarded  in  respect  to  the  rebuilding  of 
the  city  :  "  And  among  the  elect  was  Nee- 
mias,  whose  renown  is  great,  who  raised 
up  for  us  the  walls  that  were  fallen,  and 
set  up  the  gates  and  the  bars,  aad  raised 
up  our  ruins  again."  ch.  xli.x.  13.  On  the 
other  hand,  Joshua  and  Zerubbabel  are 
extolled  only  as  rebuilders  of  tho  temj)le  : 
"How  shall  we  magnify  Zorobabel  ?  even 
he  was  as  a  signet  on  the  right  hand  :  So 
was  Jesus  the  son  of  Josedec  : — who  in 
their  time  builded  the  Jionse,  and  set  up  a 
holy  temple  to  the  Lord."  vs.  11,  12. 
These  considerations  make  the  case  clear, 
it  seems  to  me,  that  the  time  referred  to — 
the  terminus  a  quo — according  to  the  fair 
interpretation,  was  the  twentieth  year  of 
Artaxerxes.  To  this  wo  are  conducted 
by  the  proper  and  necessary  exposition  of 
the  ImifjHoge,  and  by  the  orders  actually 
issued  from  the  Persian  court  in  regard  to 
the  temple  and  citj'. 

If  it  should  be  objected — the  only  ob- 
jection of  importance  that  has  been  al- 
leged against  it — that  this  would  not 
meet  the  inquiry  of  Daniel ;  that  he  was 
seeking  for  the  time  when  the  captivity 
would  cease,  and  looking  for  its  termina- 
tion as  predicted  by  Jeremiah ;  that  it 
woultl  not  console  him  to  be  referred  to 
a  period  so  remote  as  is  here  supposed — 
the  time  of  the  rebuilding  of  the  city; 
and,  still  more,  that,  not  knowing  that 
time,  the  prophecy  would  afford  him  no 
basis  of  calculation  as  to  the  appearing 
of  the  Messiah,  it  may  be  replied  :  («)  That 
the  prediction  contained  all  the  consola- 
tion and  assurance  which  Daniel  sought 
—the  assurance  that  the  city  would  be  re- 
iuilt,  and  that  an  order  would  go  forth  for 


its  restoration.  (6)  That  the  angel  does 
not  profess  to  answer  the  precise  point  of 
the  inquiry  which  Daniel  had  suggested. 
The  prayer  of  Daniel  was  the  occasion  of 
uttering  a  higher  prophecy  than  the  one 
which  he  had  been  contemplating,  (c)  It 
is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  the  de- 
sign y^SiS  iha.i  Daniel  should  be  able  to 
compute  the  exact  time  when  tho  Mes- 
siah would  appear.  It  was  sufficient  for 
him  if  he  had  the  assurance  that  ho  would 
appear,  and  if  he  were  furnished  with  a 
basis  by  which  it  might  be  calculated 
when  he  would  appear,  after  the  order  to 
rebuild  the  city  had  gone  forth,  {d)  At 
any  rate,  the  prophecy  must  have  ap- 
peared to  Daniel  to  have  a  much  more 
important  meaning  than  would  be  implied 
merely  by  a  direct  answer  to  his  prayer 
— pertaining  to  tho  close  of  tho  exile. 
The  prophecy  indubitably  stretched  far 
into  future  years.  Daniel  must  have  seen 
at  once  that  it  contained  an  important 
disclosure  respecting  future  events,  and, 
as  it  implied  that  the  exile  would  close, 
and  that  the  city  would  be  rebuilt,  and  as 
he  had  already  a  sufficient  intimation 
when  tho  exile  would  close,  from  the  pro- 
phecies of  Jeremiah,  wo  may  suppose  that 
the  mind  of  Daniel  would  rest  on  this  as 
more  than  he  had  desired  to  know — a 
revelation  far  beyond  what  he  anticipated 
when  he  set  apart  this  day  for  special 
prayer. 

The  only  remaining  difficulty  as  to  the 
time  referred  to  as  the  beginning  of  tho 
seventy  weeks — the  terminus  a  quo — is  that 
of  determining  the  exact  chronology  of  the 
twentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes — the  point 
from  which  we  are  to  reckon.  The  time, 
however,  varies  only  a  few  years  according 
to  the  different  estimates  of  chronology, 
and  not  so  as  materially  to  affect  the  result. 
The  following  are  the  principal  estimates : 


Jahn, 

Ilcngstenbero 

Hales, 

Calmet, 

Usher, 


444  B.  C. 
454       " 
444       " 
449       " 
454      " 


It  will  bo  seen  from  this,  that  the  differ- 
ence in  the  chronology  is,  at  the  greatest, 
but  ten  j-cars,  and  in  such  a  matter,  where 
the  ancient  records  are  so  indefinite,  and 
so  little  pains  were  taken  to  make  exact 
dates,  it  cannot  perhaps  bo  expected  that 
the  time  could  be  determined  with  exact 
accuracy.  Nor,  since  tho  numbers  used 
by  the  angel  are  in  a  sense  round  num< 


392 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  53&. 


bers — '  seventy  weeks,'  *  sixty-two  Treeks,' 
'one  week,'  is  it  necessary  to  suppose  tbjit 
the  time  could  Le  made  out  with  the  ex- 
actness of  a  year,  or  a  month — though 
this  has  been  often  attempted.  It  is  suf- 
ficient if  the  prediction  were  so  accurate 
and  determinate  that  there  could  be  no 
doubt,  in  general,  as  to  the  time  of  the 
appearing  of  the  Messiah,  and  so  that 
when  ho  appeared  it  should  bo  manifest 
that  ho  was  referred  to.  Ilengstenberg, 
however,  supposes  that  tho  chronology 
can  be  made  out  with  literal  accuracy. 
See  Chris,  ii.  39-1—408. 

Taking  the  dates  above  given  as  the 
terminus  a  quo  of  the  prophecy — the  time 
from  which  to  reckon  the  beginning  of 
the  sixty-nine  weeks  to  the  'Messiah  the 
Prince' — or  the  four  hundred  and  eighty- 
three  years,  we  obtain,  respectively,  the 
following  results  : 

The  period  of  444  B.  C,  the  period  of 
Jahn  and  Hales,  would  extend  to  A.  D. 
39. 
That  of  454  B.  C,  the  period  of  Ileng- 
stenberg and  Usher,  to  A.  D.  29. 
That  of  449  B.  C,  the  period  of  Calmet, 

to  A.  D.  34. 
It  is  remarkable  how  all  these  periods 
terminate  at  about  the  time  when  the  Lord 
Jesus  entered  on  his  work,  or  assumed, 
at  his  baptism,  the  public  office  of  the 
Messiah — when  ho  was  thirty  years  of 
age.  It  is  undeniable  that,  whichever 
reckoning  be  correct,  or  whatever  com- 
putation we  may  suppose  to  have  been 
emploj'cd  by  the  Jews,  the  expectation 
would  have  been  excited  in  the  public 
mind  that  the  Messiah  was  about  to  ap- 
pear at  that  time.  Perhaps  the  real  truth 
may  bo  seen  in  a  stronger  light  still  by 
supposing  that  if  a  sagacious  impostcr 
had  resolved  to  take  upon  himself  the  of- 
fice of  the  Messiah,  and  had  so  shaped 
his  plans  as  to  meet  the  national  expec- 
tations growing  out  of  this  prediction  of 
Daniel,  he  would  have  undoubtedly  set 
up  his  claims  at  about  the  time  when  the 
Lord  Jesus  publicly  appeared  as  the  Mes- 
siah. According  to  tho  common  chrono- 
logies there  would  not  have  been  a  vari- 
ance of  more  than  nine  years  in  the  cal- 
culation, and,  perhaps,  after  all,  when  we 
consider  how  little  the  chronology  of  an- 
cient times  has  been  regarded  or  settled,  it 
is  much  more  to  be  wondered  at  that  there 
ihould  be  so  great  accuracy  than  that  the 
lime   is  ro   more   certainly  determined.  I 


If,  notwithstanding  the  confusion  of  an. 
eient  dates,  the  time  is  so  nearhj  deter- 
mined with  accuracy,  is  it  not  rather 
to  be  presumed  that  if  the  facts  of  ancient 
history  could  be  ascertained  that  the  ex- 
act period  would  be  found  to  have  been 
predicted  by  the  angel? 

III.  The  next  point  properly  is,  what 
is  the  time  referred  to  by  the  phrase  '  lui/o 
the  Jlessiah  the  prince' — the  teniiinua  ad 
quern.  Here  there  can  be  but  two  opin- 
ions : — that  which  refers  it  to  his  birth, 
and  that  which  refers  it  to  his  public 
manifestation  as  the  Messiah,  or  his  taking 
the  office  upon  himself.  The  remarks 
under  the  last  head,  have  conducted  us  to 
the  probability  that  the  latter  is  intended. 
Indeed,  it  is  morally  certain  that  this  is 
so  if  we  have  ascertained  the  tcnninus  a 
quo  with  accuracy.  The  only  question 
then  is,  whether  this  is  the  fair  construc- 
tion, or  whether  the  language  can  prop- 
erly be  so  applied.  Wc  have  seen,  in  the 
interpretation  of  the  phrase  above,  that 
the  grammatical  construction  of  the  hiu- 
guage  is  such  as  might  without  impro- 
priety be  applied  to  either  event.  It  re- 
mains only  to  icok  at  the  probabilities 
that  the  latter  was  the  design.  It  may 
be  admitted,  rerbaps,  that  before  the 
event  occurred  there  might  have  been 
some  uncertainty  on  the  subject,  and  that 
with  many,  on  reading  the  prophecy,  the 
supposition  would  bo  that  it  referred  to 
the  birth  of  the  Messiah.  But  a  careful 
consideration  of  all  tho  circumstances  of 
the  passage  might  even  then  have  led  to 
difi"erent  expectation,  and  might  have 
shown  that  the  probabilities  were  that  it 
was  the  public  manifestation  of  the  Mes- 
siah that  was  intended.  Those  may  be 
regarded  as  stronger  now,  and  may  be 
such  as  to  leave  no  reasonable  doubt  on 
the  mind  ;  that  is,  we  may  now  see  what 
would  not  likely  to  have  been  seen  then — 
as  in  the  case  of  all  the  prophecies. 
Among  these  considerations  are  the  fol- 
lowing : — (a)  Such  an  interpretation  may 
be,  after  all  the  most  probable.  If  we 
conceive  of  one  who  should  have  predicted 
the  appearance  or  coming  of  Jenghio 
Khan,  or  Alaric,  or  Attila,  as  conquerors, 
it  would  not  be  unnatural  to  refer  this  to 
their  public  appearing  in  that  character, 
as  to  the  time  when  they  became  krowu. 
as  such,  and  still  more  true  would  this  be 
if  one  who  should  be  inaugurated  or  set 
apart  to  a  public  office.  If,  for  example, 
there  had  been  a  prophecy  of  Gregory 


B.  C.  558.J 


CHAPTER  IX 


393 


the  Grent,  or  Leo  X.  as  Popes,  it  wonid 
bo  most  natural,  unless  there  was  a  dis- 
linct  reference  to  their  birth,  to  refer  this 
to  their  election  and  consecration  an 
Popes,  for  that  ^vould  in  fact  be  the  pe- 
riod when  they  appeared  as  such,  (b)  In 
the  ease  of  this  prophecy  there  is  no 
allusion  to  the  birth  of  the  Messiah.  It 
is  not  'to  his  birth,' or  'to  his  incarna- 
tion,' but  'unto  the  ^Messiah  the  Prince:' 
that  is,  most  manifestly,  when  he  appeared 
as  such,  and  was  in  fact  such.  In  many 
instances  in  the  prophecies  there  are 
allusions  to  the  birth  of  the  Messiah,  and 
so  numerous  and  accurate  had  they  be- 
come that  there  was  a  general  expecta- 
tion of  the  event  at  about  the  time  when 
he  was  actually  born.  But  in  the  pas- 
sage before  us,  the  language  is  that  which 
would  be  used  on  the  supposition  that  the 
designed  reference  was  to  his  entering  as 
Messiah  on  the  functions  of  his  ofiFice, 
and  not  such  as  would  have  been  so  natu- 
rally employed  if  the  reference  had  been 
to  his  birth,  (c)  Ilis  taking  upon  him- 
self the  office  of  the  Messiah  bj'  baptism 
and  bj'  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on 
him,  was  in  fact  the  most  prominent 
event  in  his  work.  Before  that  he  had 
passed  his  life  in  obscurity.  The  work 
which  he  did  as  Messiah,  was  commenced 
it  that  time,  and  was  to  be  dated  from 
chat  period.  In  fact  he  was  not  the  Mes- 
siah as  such  till  he  was  set  apart  to  the 
office — -any  more  than  an  heir  to  a  crown 
is  king  until  he  is  crowned,  or  an  elected 
chief  magistrate  is  President  before  he 
Las  taken  the  oath  of  office.  The  position 
which  he  occupied  was,  that  he  was  de- 
signated or  destined  for  the  office  of  the 
Messiah,  but  had  not  in  fact  entered  on 
it,  and  could  not  as  yet  be  spoken  of  as 
such.  (d)  This  is  the  usual  method 
of  recording  the  reign  of  a  king — not 
from  his  birth,  but  from  his  coronation. 
Thus  in  the  table  above  respecting  the 
Persian  kings,  the  periods  included  are 
those  from  the  beginning  of  the  reign,  not 
from  the  birth,  to  the  decease.  So  in  all 
statutes  and  laws,  as  when  we  say  the 
lirst  of  George  III.,  or  the  second  of  Vic- 
toria, <fec.  (e)  To  these  considerations 
may  be  added  an  argument  stated  by 
Hengstenberg,  which  seems  to  make  the 
proof  irrefragable.  It  is  in  the  following 
words:  "After  the  course  of  seventy 
weeks  shall  the  whole  work  of  salvation 
to  be  performed  by  the  Messiah,  be  com-  j 
plotcd;  after  sixty-nino  weeks,  and,  as  it  j 


appears  from  the  more  accurate  determi- 
nation in  ver.  27,  in  the  middle  of  tho 
seventieth,  ho  shall  bo  cut  off.  As  now, 
according  to  the  passage  before  us,  sixty- 
nine  weeks  shall  elapse  before  the  Mes- 
siah, there  remains  from  that  event  to  the 
completion  of  salvation,  only  a.  period  of 
seven,  until  his  violent  death  of  three  and 
a  half  years;  a  certain  proof  that  'unto 
the  Messiah'  must  refer,  not  t<>  his  birlh, 
but  to  tho  appearance  of  the  Messiah  as 
such."     Christol.  ii.  337. 

IV.  The  next  que^tion,  then  is,  whether 
according  to  this  estimate  the  time  can 
be  made  out  with  any  degree  of  accuracy. 
The  date  of  the  decrees  of  Artaxerxes  are 
found  to  be,  according  to  the  common 
reckoning  of  chnmologists,  either  441,  or 
'454,  or  449  B.  C.  The  addition  of  4S.3 
I  years  to  them  we  found  also  to  reach,  re- 
spectively, to  A.  D.  39,  to  A,  D.  29,  and 
I  to  A.  D.  34.  One  of  these  (29)  varies 
scarcely  at  all  from  the  time  when  the 
Saviour  was  baptized,  at  thirty  .years  of 
age  ;  another  (34)  varies  scarcely  at  all 
from  the  time  when  he  was  put  to  death  ; 
and  either  of  them  is  so  accurate  that  the 
mind  of  any  one  who  should  have  made 
the  estimate  when  tho  ccuiimand  to  build 
the  city  went  forth,  would  have  been 
directed  with  great  precision  to  the  ex- 
pectation of  the  true  time  of  his  appear- 
ance; and  to  those  who  lived  when  he 
did  appear,  tho  time  was  so  accurate  that, 
in  the  reckoning  of  any  of  the  prevailing 
methods  of  chronology,  it  would  have 
been  sufficiently  clear  to  lead  them  to  the 
expectation  that  he  was  about  to  come. 
Two  or  three  remarks,  however,  may  be 
made  in  regard  to  this  point,  (a)  One  is, 
that  it  is  now,  perhaps,  impossible  to  de- 
termine with  j)rec>se  accuracy  the  histori- 
cal period  of  events  so  remote.  Time 
was  not  then  measured  as  accurately  as 
it  is  now  ;  current  events  were  not  as  dis- 
tinctly recorded ;  chronological  tables 
were  not  kept  as  they  are  now;  there  was 
no  uniform  method  of  determining  the 
length  of  the  .year,  and  the  records  were 
much  less  safely  kept.  This  is  manifest 
because,  even  in  so  important  an  event  aj 
the  issuing  of  the  command  to  rebuild  the 
city  in  the  time  of  Artaxerxes — an  event 
which  it  would  be  supposed  was  one  of 
sufficient  moment  to  have  merited  an  ex- 
act record,  at  least  among  the  Jews,  then? 
is  now,  among  the  best  chronologists,  a 
difference  often  years  as  to  the  computa- 
tion of  the  time.     (6)  There  is  a  variation 


394 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538. 


arising  from  the  difference  of  the  lunar  or 
the  solar  j'ear — some  nations  reckoning 
by  the  one,  and  some  by  the  other,  and 
fhe  difference  between  them,  in  the  pe- 
riod now  under  consideration,  would  be 
greater  than  that  which  now  occurs  in 
the  ordinary  reckonings  of  chronology, 
(c)  Till  the  exact  length  of  the  year,  as 
then  understood,  is  ascertained,  there 
could  bo  no  hope  of  fixing  the  time  with 
the  exactness  of  a  month  or  a  day,  and  if 
the  usual  and  general  understanding  of 
the  length  of  the  year  bo  adopted,  then 
the  time  here  referred  to  would  be  so 
intelligible  that  there  would  be  no  dif- 
ficulty in  ascertaining  at  about  what  time 
the  Messiah  was  to  appear,  or  when  he 
did  appear  in  determining  that  it  was  he. 
This  was  all  that  was  really  necessary  in 
regard  to  the  prophec}'.  Yet  [d)  it  has 
been  supposed  that  the  time  could  be 
made  out,  even  under  these  disadvan- 
tages, with  almost  entire  accuracy.  The 
examination  in  the  case  may  be  seen  at 
length  in  Hengstenberg,  Chris,  ii.  394 — 
408.  It  is  agreed  on  all  hands  that  the 
commencement  of  the  reign  of  Xerxes 
occurred  in  the  year  485,  before  Christ, 
and  that  Artaxerxes  died  in  423.  The 
difference  concerns  only  the  beginning  of 
the  reign  of  Artaxerxes.  If  that  occurred 
in  the  year  464  B.  C.  then  the  problem  is 
solved,  for  then  the  decree  of  the  twen- 
tieth year  of  Artaxerxes  would  occur  444 
B.  C,  and  if  483  be  added  to  that,  the  re- 
sult is  A.  D.  29 — a  difference  then,  even 
in  reckoning  whole  years,  and  round  num- 
bers, of  only  one  j'car  between  that  and 
the  time  when  Jesus  was  baptised  by 
John.  The  full  proof  of  this  point,  about 
the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes, 
may  be  seen  in  Hengstenberg  as  above. 
The  argument,  though  long,  is  so  im- 
portant, and  so  clear,  that  it  maj'  with- 
out impropriety  be  inserted  in  this 
place. 

"  According  to  the  prophecy,  the  ter- 
mi'tins  a  quo,  the  twentieth  year  of  Arta- 
xerxes, is  separated  from  the  terminus  ad 
qucm,  the  public  appearance  of  Christ,  by 
a  period  of  69  weeks  of  years,  or  f\)ur 
hundred  and  eightj^-thrce  years.  If,  now, 
we  compare  history  with  this,  it  must 
appear,  even  to  the  most  prejudiced,  in 
the  highest  degree  remarkable,  that 
Bmong  all  the  current  chronological  de- 
terminations of  this  period,  not  one  dif- 
«ers  over  ten  years  from  the  testimony 
♦f  the  prophecy.     This  wonder  must  rise  , 


to  the  highest  pitch,  when  it  appearj 
from  an  accurate  examination  of  thesa 
determinations,  that  the  only  one  among 
them,  which  is  correct,  makes  the  pro- 
phecy and  history  correspond  with  each 
other,  even  to  a  year. 

"  Happily,  to  attain  this  end,  we  are  not 
compelled  to  involve  ourselves  in  a  laby- 
rinth of  chronological  inquiries.  Wo 
find  ourselves,  in  the  main,  on  sure 
ground.  All  chronologists  agree,  that 
the  commencement  of  the  reign  of  Xei"- 
xes  falls  in  the  year  485  before  Christ, 
the  death  of  Arta.\erxes,  in  the  3'ear  423. 
The  difference  concerns  only  the  year  of 
the  commencement  of  the  reign  jf  Ar- 
taxerxes. Our  problem  is  completely 
solved,  when  we  have  shown  that  this 
falls  in  the  year  474  before  Christ.  For 
then  the  twentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes  ia 
the  year  455  before  Christ,  according  to 
the  usual  reckoning,*  =299  U.  C. 
Add  to  this,  483  years. 

783  U.  C. 
"  TTe  should  probably  have  been  saved 
the  trouble  of  this  investigation,  had  not 
the  error  cf  aa  acute  man,  and  the  want 
of  ir.dependsiice  in  his  successors,  dark- 
ened what  was  in  itself  clear.  Accord- 
ing to  Thucydides,  Artaxerxes  began  to 
reign  shortly  before  the  flight  of  The- 
mistoeles  to  Asia.  Deceived  by  certain 
specious  arguments,  hereafter  to  be  ex- 
amined, Dodwell,  in  the  Annall.  Thncyd., 
placed  both  events  in  the  year  465  before 
Christ.  The  thorough  refutation  of  Yi- 
tringa,  in  the  cited  treatise,  remained, 
strange  as  it  may  appear,  unknown  to 
the  philologians  and  historians,  even  as 
it  seems  to  those  of  Holland,  as  Wessel- 
ing.  The  view  of  Dodwell,  adopted  also 
by  Corsini  in  the  Fasta  Attica,  became 
the  prevailing  one,  at  which  we  cannot 
wonder,  when  we  consider  how  seldom, 
in  modern  times,  chronological  investi- 
gations in  general  have  been  fundamental 
and  independent ;  when,  e.  g.,  wo  observe 
that  Poppo,  a  generally  esteemed  recent 
editor  of  Thucydides,  in  a  thick  volume  en- 
titled in  Thucydidem  Coinynentarii politici, 

*The  intelligent  reader  will  perceive  that 
the  author  has  intentionally  made  his  investi- 
gation entirely  independent  of  the  difficult  in- 
quiries respecting  the  year  of  fhe  birth  of 
Christ,  which,  in  his  judgment,  have  in  rcc<;nt 
times,  by  the  introduction  of  uncertain  astro- 
nomical combinations,  particularly  by  Munter 
and  Ideler,  been  led  far  astray. 


B.  C.  538.J 


CHAPTER  IX. 


395 


gcogra])li.,  chronologic^,  furnishes,  in  re- |  sonable  efTorts  of  Pausanias  first  ctm- 
ferenco  to  the  last,  nothing  more  than  a  ;  mencecl ;  the  flight  of  Themistoclcf!,  how- 
reprint  of  the  school  edition  of  the  chro-  |  ever,  was  a  consequence  of  the  complaint, 
flological  tables  collected  from  Dodwell,  j  which  was  raised  against  him,  out  of  the 
excusing  himself  with  an  odio  quodam  documents  found  after  the  death  of  Pau- 
iiivetcrato  totins  hiijus  disciplinai .'  Clin-  sanias.  But  Isocrates  says,  in  the  Pana- 
ton  also  {Fnsti  Hellenici,  hit.  vert.  Krutjer,  \  thenaikos,  that  the  dominion  of  the  Lace- 
Leipz.,  1830),  though  he  clearly  perceives,  demonians  had  endured  ten  years.  The 
that  Dodwell  has  confused  the  whole  expedition  of  Xerxes  taken  as  the  ter- 
chronology  of  this  period  (comp.,  e.  g.,  minus  a  quo,  this  transfer  falls  in  the 
pp.  248 — 253),  has  not  been  able  to  free  year  470."  But  we  may  spare  ourselves 
himself  from  him  iu  the  most  important   the  labour,  which  Vitringa  takes,  to  in- 


poirts,  though  he  successfully  opposed 
him  in  several ;  and  thus  the  confusion 
only  becomes  still  greater,  since  now 
neither  the  actual  chronological  succes- 
sion of  events,  nor  the  one  ingeniously 


validate  this  alleged  testimony  of  Iso- 
crates, since  all  recent  scholars,  in  part 
independent  of  one  another,  agree  that 
Isocrates  speaks  of  a  ten  years'  dominion, 
not  before,  but  after  that   of  the  Athe- 


in^s'nted  by  Dodwell,  any  longer  remains,  i  nians  ;  comp.  Coray,  on  Pan.  c.  19. 
Nevertheless,  the  truth  is  advanced  by  j  Dahlmann,  Forschungen,  I.  p.  45.  Krii- 
this  increased  confusion.  For  now  the  ger,  p.  221,  Clinton,  p.  250,  fiF.  2.  That 
harmony  introduced  by  Dodwell  into  the  j  Themistocles  in  the  year  472  was  still  ir 
fictitious  history  is  destroyed.  The  hon-  Athens,  Corsini  infers  [Fasti  Alt.  Ill 
our,  however,  of  having  again  discovered  ,  p.  ISO)  from  jEI.  lib.  9.  c.  5.  According 
the  true  path,  belongs  to   Kriiger  alone,    to    this,  Themistocles  sent   back  Hiero, 


who,  after  more  than  a  hundred  j'ears, 
as  an  entirely  independent  inquirer,  co- 
incides with  Vitringa,  in  the  same  result, 


who  was  coming  to  the  Olympic  games, 
asserting,  that,  whoever  had  not  taken 
part  in  the  greatest  danger,  could  not  be 


and  in  part  in  tho  employment  of  the  '  a  sharer  of  the  joy.  (The  fact  is  also  re- 
same  arguments.  In  the  acute  treatise,  |  lated  by  Plutarch.)  Now,  as  Hiero  01. 
Ueher  den  Cimonischen  Frieden,  (in  the  |  75,  3  (478)  began  to  reigu,  only  the  01. 
Archiv  f.  Philologie  und  Pddagog.  von  .77  (472)  could  be  intended.  But  who 
Seehode,  I.  2.  p.  205,  ff.,)  he  places  the  does  not  at  once  perceive,  that  the  refer- 
death  of  Xerxes  in  the  year  474  or  473, '  ence  to  the  games  of  the  01.  76  (476)  was 
and  the  flight  of  Themistocles  a  year  far  more  obvious,  since  the  occurrence 
later.  This  treatise  may  serve  to  shame  pre-supposed  that  the /jtyio-rof  twi/ (cii/^iJKji' 
those,  who  reject  in  the  mass  the  grounds  \  was  still  fresh  in  remembrance  ?  3.  Ae- 
of  our  opinion,  (to  the  establishment  of  cording  to  this  supposition,  Xerxes  would 
which  we  now  proceed,)  with  the  remark,  reign  only  eleven  years;  Artaxerxes,  on 
that  the  author  has  only  found  what  he  the  contrary,  fifty-one.  This  is  in  oppo- 
sought.  Whoever  does  not  feel  capable  !  sition  to  the  testimony  of  the  Can.  Pto- 
of  entering  independently  upon  the  inves-    lem.  (comp.  thereon  Ideler,  I.  p.  109,  ff".), 


tigation,  should  at  least  be  prevented 
from  condemning,  by  the  circumstance, 
that  a  learned  man,  who  has  no  other 
design  in  view,  than  to  elucidate  a  chro- 
nologically confused  period  of  Grecian 
history,  gives,  for  the  event  which  serves 


which  gives  to  Xerxes  twenty-one,  and 
to  Artaxerxes  forty-one  years ;  and  of 
Ctesias,  who  gives  to  Artaxerxes  forty- 
two  years,  and  of  some  other  writers; 
compare  the  passages  in  Biihr  on  Ctesias, 
p.  184.      Ceteris  jjaribus,  this  argumenv 


to  determine  the  terminus  a  quo  of  our  j  would  be  wholly  decisive.  But  when 
prophecy,  the  precise  year,  which  places  |  other  weighty  authorities  are  opposed  to 
prophecy  and  fulfilment  in  the  most  exact  it,  it  is  not  of  itself  sufficient  to  outweigh 
harmony.  them.     The  canon   has   high   authority, 

"We  examine  first  the  grounds  which  only  where  it  rests  on  astronomical  ob- 
Besza  to  favour  the  opinion,  that  the  reign  servations,  which  is  here  not  the  case, 
of  Artaxerxes  commenced  in  the  year  Otherwise  it  stands  on  the  same  ground 
465.  1.  "The  flight  of  Themistocles  as  all  other  historical  sources.  The  whole 
must  precede  the  transfer  of  the  dominion  error  was  committed,  as  soon  as  only  an 
of  Greece  from  Athens  to  Spart.i  by  se-  '''  in  an  ancient  authority  was  confounded 
veral  years.  For  this  happened  during ,  with  a  xi  ',  for  when  a  reign  of  twenty- 
the  siege  of  Byiantium,  when  the  trea- 1  one  years  had   thui  been    attributed  to 


396 


£ANIEL 


[B.  C.  G38. 


Xerxes,  the  shortening  of  the  reign  of 
Artaxerxes  to  fortv-one  years,  necessarily 
followed.  AVesseling  (on  Diod.  12,  64,) 
attributes  forty-five  years  to  Artaxer- 
xes, thus  without  hesitation  rejecting  the 
authority  of  the  canon.  To  these  argu- 
ments, already  adduced  by  others,  we 
suhioin  the  following.  4.  It  seems  to  be 
evident  from  Ctesias,  chap.  20,  that  Arta- 
xerxes was  born  a  considerable  time  after 
the  commencement  of  the  reign  of  Xer- 
xes. Ctesias,  after  relating  it,  proceeds  : 
yancX  ii  "S-iplm  'Ovoipa  Svyarcpa  ''^AjiWTptv 
Koi  yivzrai  aircj  iraij  Aa/)£iaiOf,  koX  CTCpoi 
jiera  iio  triq  "ToTauvrii,  Koi  iVt  'ApTa^cp^rj;, 
If  he  relates  the  events  in  the  true  chro- 
nological order,  Artaxerxes  in  the  year 
474  could  at  most  have  been  seven  years 
old.  On  the  contrary,  however,  all  ac- 
counts agree,  that  at  the  death  of  Xerxes, 
although  still  young,  (pomp.  Justin,  3, 1,) 
he  was  yet  of  a  sufficient  age  to  be  capa- 
ble of  reigning  himself  AVe  must  not  be 
satisfied  with  the  answer,  that  it  is  very 
improbable  that  Xerxes,  who  was  born  at 
the  beginning  of  the  thirty-sixth  year  of 
the  reign  of  Darius,  (comp.  Herod.  7,  2,) 
and  was  already  34 — 35  years  old  at  his 
death,  was  not  married  until  so  late  a 
period.  Ctesias  himself  frees  us  from  the 
embarrassment  into  which  we  were  thrown 
by  his  inaccuracy.  According  to  chap. 
22,  Megabyzus  was  already  married,  be- 
fore the  expedition  against  Greece,  with 
a  daughter  of  Xerxes,  who,  already  men- 
tioned, chap.  20,  if  Ctesias  is  there  chro- 
nologically accurate,  could  not  have  been 
born  before  that  time.  According  to 
chap.  28,  Megabyzus,  immediately  after 
the  return  of  Xerxes  from  Greece,  com- 
plained to  him  of  the  shameful  conduct 
of  this  wife  of  his.  5.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  the  Ahasuerus  of  the  book  of 
Esther,  is  the  same  as  Xerxes.  But  the 
twelfth  year  of  this  king  is  there  ex- 
pressly mentioned,  chap.  3  :  7,  and  the 
events  related  in  the  following  context 
fall,  in  part,  about  the  end  of  the  same 
year.  But  this  difSeulty  vanishes,  as 
soon  as  we  include  the  years  of  tho  co- 
regency  of  Xerxes  with  Darius.  Accord- 
ing to  the  full  account  in  Ilerodot.  7. 
chap.  2 — 4,  Xerxes,  two  years  before  the 
doaih  of  Darius,  was  established  by  him, 
fts  king,  comp.  e.  g.  chap.  4. :  dTriiqe  it 
^aaiXria  Utfatiiit  AapcU  z-tplca.  Of  the 
custom  of  the  Hebrew  writers  to  include 
the  years  of  a  co-regency,  where  it  ex- 
isted, we  have  a  remarkable  example  in 


the  account  loncerning  Nebuchadnezzar 
'comp.  Beitr.  I.  p.  63).  But  we  find 
even  in  the  book  of  Esther  itself,  plain 
indications  of  this  mole  of  reckoning. 
The  account  of  the  great  feast,  chap.  1, 
is  placed  in  its  true  light  by  this  supposi- 
tion. The  occasion  of  it  was  the  actual 
commencement  of  tho  reign  of  Xerxes, 
though  wo  need  not  on  this  account  ex- 
clude, what  has  hitherto  been  regarded 
as  the  exclusive  object,  consultations  with 
the  nobles  respecting  the  expeditions 
about  to  be  undertaken.  What  is  related, 
chap.  2 :  16,  then  falls  precisely  in  the 
time  of  the  return  of  Xerxes  from  Greece, 
while  otherwise,  and  this  is  attended  with 
diificulty,  about  two  years  after  that 
event. 

"We  now  proceed  to  lay  down  the  posi- 
tive grounds  for  our  view;  and  in  the 
first  place,  the  immediate,  and  then  the 
mediate  proofs,  which  latter  are  far  more 
numerous  and  strong,  since  they  show, 
that  tho  flight  of  Themistocles,  which 
must  precede  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes, 
cannot  possibly  be  placed  later  than  473 
before  Christ. 

"  To  the  first  class,  belong  the  following. 
1.  It  must  appear  very  strange  to  those, 
who  assume  a  twenty-one  years'  reign 
of  Xerxes,  that  the  whole  period  from 
the  eleventh  year,  is  a  complete  tabula 
rasa.  The  biblical  accounts  stop  short 
at  the  close  of  the  tenth  year.  Ctesias 
relates  only  one  inconsiderable  event  after 
the  Grecian  war,  chap.  28,  which  oc- 
curred immediately  after  its  termination. 
No  later  writer  has  ventured  to  introduce 
anything  into  the  ten  years,  which,  ac- 
cording to  our  view,  the  permutation  of 
an  1  and  k  adds  to  his  age. 

"We  possess  a  twofold  lestimonj'.  which 
places  the  return  of  Xerxes  from  Greece, 
and  his  death,  in  so  close  connection,  that, 
without  rejecting  it,  we  cannot  possibly 
assume  a  fifteen  years'  reign  after  this 
return,  but  are  rather  compelled  to  place 
his  death  not  beyond  the  year  474.  The 
first  is  that  of  ^lian,  Vai:  Hist.  13,  3  : 
lira  inavtK^Cov^  a'iaXiara  dvSptonwv  drrtSai'fi/, 
dr:oa(payiii  ^VKTwp  iv  rrj  ciiir\  viro  tov  viov. 
The  second,  that  of  Justin,  3,  1.  "Xer- 
xes rex  Persanim,  terror  antea  gentium, 
bello  in  Grceciam  infcliciter  gesto,  etiam 
suis  contemtui  esse  cajrit.  Quippe  Arta- 
hanus  j^rcf/ecius  ejus,  dejlciente  quotidie 
regis  mnjestate,  in  spiem  regiii  adductua, 
cum  septem  robustissiiiiis  Jiliis,"  etc. 

"  3.  The  testimonies  of  Justin;  1.  c,  re- 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    IX, 


397 


specting  the  ago  of  his  sons  at  his  death, 
are  not  reconciliible  -vv-th  the  twenty-one 
years'  reign  of  Xerxes.  "  Seciin'or  de 
Artnxerxe,  pncro  adniodum,  Jin<jit  rerjcin 
a  Dario,  qui  erat  adolesccns,  cjno  7nutii- 
rius  regno  2)otirettii;  occisuni,"  If  Xerxes 
reigned  twenty-one  years,  his  first  born, 
Darius,  according  to  a  comparison  of 
Ctesias,  chap.  22,  could  not  at  his  death 
have  been  an  udulescens,  but  at  least 
thirty- one  years  old.  On  the  contrary, 
if  eleven  years'  reign  be  assumed,  these 
decerrainations  are  entirely  suitable.  Da- 
rius was  then  towards  twenty-ono  years 
old.  Artaxerxes,  according  to  Ctesias, 
chap.  20,  near  four  3'ears  younger  than 
Darius,  about  seventeen.  This  determi- 
nation shows  also,  tliat  it  cannot  be  ob- 
jected against  a  fifty-one  years'  reign  of 
Artaxerxes,  that  it  would  give  him  too 
great  an  age.  The  .suggestion  can  be  re- 
futed by  the  simple  remark,  that  the 
length  of  his  life  remains  exactly  the 
same,  whether  he  reigned  fifty-one  or 
forty-one  years.  If  he  ascended  the 
throne  at  seventeen,  his  life  terminated 
at  sixty-eight. 

"4.  According  to  the  most  numerous 
and  weighty  testimonies,  the  peace  of 
Cimon  was  probably  concluded  after  the 
battlefcof  the  Eurymedon  (before  Christ 
470).  Now  as  all  agree  that  this  peace 
was  concluded  with  Artaxerxes,  the  com- 
mencement of  his  reign  must,  in  any 
event,  be  placed  before  470.  Comp. 
Kiirger,  1.  c.  p.  218. 

"  5.  Thehistory  of  Xehemiah  isscarcelj' 
reconeilablo  with  the  supposition,  that 
Artaxerxes  reigned  only  forty-seven  years. 
After  Nchemiah  had  accomplished  all 
that  is  related  in  chap.  1 — 12  of  his  book, 
he  returned  to  Persia  to  discharge  the 
duties  of  his  office,  at  court.  This  hap- 
pened, according  to  13  :  6,  in  the  thirty- 
second  year  of  Artaxerxes.  The  time  of 
his  return  is  not  accurately  determined.  It 
gays  merely,  after  a  considerable  time,  the 
O'O;  VpS-  That  his  absence,  however, 
must  have  continued  a  whole  series  of 
years,  appear?  from  the  relation  of  that 
which  took  place  in  the  mean  time.  The 
law  against  marriage  with  foreign  wo- 
men, to  the  observance  of  which  the  peo- 
ple had  bound  themselves  anew,  chap. 
10  :  30,  was  first  violated  during  his  ab- 
sonce ;  then  again  by  a  decree  of  the 
pjople,  executed  in  all  severity,  13  :  1 — 3, 
and  then  again  broken,  as  appears  fromJ 
34 


the  fact,  that  Nehoraiah,  at  his  return, 
according  to  v.  23,  found  a  great  many 
foreign  women  in  the  cokmy.  That  these 
marriages  had  already  existed  fur  some 
time,  appears  from  v.  24,  where  it  is  said, 
that  the  children  of  them  had  spoken 
half  in  the  language  of  Ashdod,  and  could 
not  speak  II  ebre w.  A  long  absence  is  also 
implied  in  the  other  abuses  which  Nehe- 
miah,  according  to  chap.  13:  10  sq., 
found  on  his  return.  He  saw  the  fruits 
of  the  former  labours  almost  destroyed. 
The  same  is  also  evident  from  the  pro- 
phecies of  Malachi,  which  were  delivered 
exactly  in  the  time  between  the  two 
periods  of  Nehcmiah's  presence  at  Jeru- 
salem ;  comp.  Vitringa's  excellent  Dis- 
sert, de  jEtnte  Mai.,  in  his  (96s?.  ss.  VI. 
7.  t.  2.  p.  353  sq.  The  condition  of  the 
people  appears  here,  as  it  could  have 
been  only  after  they  had  already  been 
deprived,  for  a  considerable  time,  of  their 
two  faithful  leaders,  Ezra,  who,  having 
arrived  thirteen  years  earlier,  had  co- 
operated for  a  considerable  time  with 
Nchemiah,  and  Nehemiah  himself.  But, 
if  we  consider  barely  the  first-mentioned 
fact,  the  marriages  with  foreign  women, 
it  will  be  evident,  that  a  longer  period 
than  nine  years  would  be  required.  For 
each  change,  there  will  then  only  three 
years  be  allowed,  and  as  this  is  undeni- 
ably too  little  for  the  third,  according  to 
V.  24,  the  two  first  must*  be  still  moro 
shortened,  which  is  inadmissible.  Be- 
sides, we  do  not  even  have  nine  years 
for  these  events,  if  the  reign  of  Arta- 
xerxes is  fixed  at  forty-one  years.  For 
the  relation  of  Nehemiah  pre-supposes, 
that  Artaxerxes  was  yet  living  at  the 
time  of  its  composition.  This,  however, 
cannot  be  placed  in  the  time  immediately 
after  the  return  of  Nehemiah,  since  it 
must  have  been  preceded  by  the  abolition 
of  all  these  abuses.  If,  however,  we  are 
conducted  by  the  authority  of  Nehemiah, 
which  is  liable  to  no  exception,  since  he 
was  contemporary,  and  closely  connected 
with  Artaxerxes,  a  few  years  over  forty- 
one,  we  have  gained  much.  For  then 
the  only  objection  to  our  determination, 
the  testimc.ny  of  the  canon,  is  completely 
set  aside. 

"  AVo  must  premise  a  remark,  before  we 
bring  forward  our  indirect  proofs,  in  order 
to  justify  the  connection,  in  which  we 
place  the  commencement  of  the  reign  of 
Artaxerxes  with  the  flight  of  Themisto- 
cles.     This  connection  has   not,  indeed. 


598 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538 


the  unanimous  testimony  of  the  ancient 
writers  in  its  favour.  The  vouchers  for  it 
are,  Thucydides,  chap.  137,  where  it  is  said 
of  Themistocles,  who  hud  come  into  Asia, 
iantiinci  Ypajiftara  £{  (iaaCKia  '  ApTa\t(tlfiii 
tov  HtpJoD,  I'tuoTi  liaaiXtvofTa,  and  Charon 
of  Lampsacus,  who,  according  to  Plu- 
tarch, Them.  chap.  27,  makes  him  in  like 
manner  fly  to  Artaxerxes.  On  the  con- 
trary, others,  as  Ephorus,  Dinon,  Kli- 
tarch,  and  Heraclides  (comp.  Plut.  1.  c.), 
represent  him  as  going  to  Xerxes.  If, 
now,  we  examine  these  testimonies,  ac- 
cording to  the  authority  of  the  witnesses, 
the  decision  will  unquestionably  be  in 
favour  of  that  of  Thucydides  and  Charon. 
Thucydides  was  contemporary  with  Ar- 
taxerxes, and  was  born  about  the  time 
of  the  flight  of  Themistocles.  This  prince 
of  Greek  historians  gives,  chap.  97,  as 
the  cause,  why  he  relates  the  events  be- 
tween the  Median  and  Peloponnesian  war, 
that  all  his  predecessors  had  passed  over 
these  events  in  silence,  and  that  the  only 
one  who  touched  upon  them,  Hellanicus, 
lipaxl:it>i  re  Kai  rot;  ^pdioij  ovk  aKpifSd; 
iKciivrjaSr)  them,  from  which  it  is  evident, 
first,  how  little  certain  are  the  accounts  of 
this  period  in  later  authors,  because  they 
can  have  no  credible  contemporary  vouch- 
er, since  he  could  not  have  been  unknown 
to  Thucydides;  and  second,  that  Thucydi- 
des himself  claims  to  be  regarded  as  a  care- 
ful and  accurate  historian  of  this  period, 
and  therefore  must  be  esteemed  such,  be- 
cause so  honest  a  man  would  assume  no- 
thing to  himself,  which  did  not  belong  to 
him.  The  other  witness,  Charon,  was  the 
less  liable  to  err,  since,  at  the  very  time  of 
this  event,  he  was  a  writer  of  history,  and 
even  lived  in  Asia.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  oldest  witnesses  for  the  opposite  sup- 
position, lived  more  than  a  century  after 
the  event.  Ephorus  (see  on  his  Akrisie, 
Dahlmann)  outlived  the  dominion  of  Al- 
exander in  Asia;  Dinon  was  father  of 
Klitarch,  who  accompanied  Alexander. 

"In  weighing  these  grounds,  the  au- 
thority of  Thucydides  and  Charon  was 
unhesitatingly  followed  in  ancient  times. 
Plutarch,  1.  c.  does  this,  with  the  remark, 
that  the  testimony  of  Thucydides  agrees 
better  with  the  chronological  works. 
Nepos  says:  "  Scio  plerosque  ita  scrip- 
V«»e,  Themistoclem  Xerxe  rer/nanfe  jn 
Asiam  transiisse :  sed  ego  poti/isinnim 
Thttcydidi  credo,  quod  cetate  jiroximus  de 
\i«,  qui  illorum  temporum  historias  reli- 


querunt  et  cjusdeni  civitatis  fuit."  Suidati, 
and  the  Scholiast  on  Ariatoph.  Equitea, 
from  which  the  former  borrowed  verbatim 
his  second  article  on  Themistocles,  makes 
him  flee,  npoq  tov  'Apra^cp^rii'^  101/  Ecpfot) 
TOV  Ilipoov  TTaica,  without  even  mention- 
ing the  other  supposition.  And  in  this 
respect,  we  have  the  less  fear  of  contra- 
diction, since,  as  far  as  we  know,  all  mo- 
dern critics,  without  exception,  follow 
Thucydides  and  Charon.  We  only  still 
remark,  that  the  opposite  view  can  the 
more  easily  be  rejected,  since  iuS  origin 
can  so  readily  be  explained,  either  from 
the  fact,  that  this  event  fell  on  the  bor- 
der of  the  reign  of  Xerxes  and  of  Arta- 
xerxes, or  from  a  simple  confounding  of 
the  two  names,  the  assumption  of  which 
is  more  easy,  the  more  frequentlj'  it  oc- 
curs;  we  find  it  even  in  Aristotle,  the 
contemporary  of  those  writers,  Pol.  6,  8, 
and  twice  in  Ctesias,  chap.  35,  where 
Bjihr  would  make  a  change  in  opposition 
to  all  the  manuscripts,  and  chap.  44. 
Comp.  Bilhr  on  the  passage,  and  Reima- 
rus  on  Bio  Cass.  II.  p.  1370.  Finally, 
the  error  might  arise  also  from  the  circum- 
stance, that  the  flight  of  Themistocles 
was  placed  in  the  right  year,  but  twenty- 
one  years  were  attributed  to  Xerxes, 
from  which  it  necessarily  follows,  that  he 
took  refuge  with  Xerxes.  This  last  opi- 
nion is  favoured  by  the  coincidence  of 
several  contemporary  writers  in  the  same 
error,  which  pre-supposes  some  plausible 
reason  for  it. 

"We  now  proceed  to  lay  down  our  indi- 
rect proofs.  1.  AVe  begin  with  the  testi- 
mony which  gives  precisely  the  year  of 
the  flight  of  Themistocles,  that  of  Cicero, 
Lai.  chap.  12.  It  is  true,  Corsini,  1.  c. 
3,  p.  ISO,  asserts,  that  Cicero  speaks  of 
the  year  in  which  Themistocles  was  ban- 
ished from  Athens;  but  we  need  only 
examine  the  passage,  to  be  convinced  of 
the  contrary:  "Themistocles — -fecit  idem, 
quod  20.  annis  ante  apud  nos  fecerat  Co- 
riolanvs."  The  flight  of  Coriolanus  to 
the  Volci  falls  in  the  year  263  U.  C,  B. 
C.  492.  The  flight  of  Themistocles  is 
accordingly  placed  by  Cicero  in  the  year 
472,  a  year  later  than  by  us,  which  is  of 
no  importance,  since  the  round  number 
twenty  was  the  more  suitable  to  the  ob- 
ject of  Cicero,  as  the  more  accurate  nine- 
teen, for  the  Chronologists.  If  Dodwell'a 
view  were  correct,  there  would  bo  tha 
space  of  twenty-seven  years  between  th« 
two  events. 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER   IX. 


399 


"2.  Diodorus  Siculus,  who,  11, 55,  places 
tho  flight  of  Themistocles  in  01.  77,  2 
(B.  C.  471),  in  any  event  favours  our 
determination,  which  ascends  only  two 
years  higher,  far  more  than  the  opposite 
one.  AVe  remark,  however,  that  ho  also 
places  in  the  same  year  the  residence  of 
T^hemistocles  at  Magnesia,  and  his  death; 
and  thus  it  is  evident,  that  whether  by 
mistake  or  design,  he  compresses  the 
events  in  the  life  of  Themistocles,  which 
QUed  up  some  years,  into  the  year  of  his 
death.  If  this  took  place  in  the  year 
471,  tho  flight  must  bo  dated  at  least  as 
far  back  as  -173.  Our  determination  dif- 
fers only  a  single  j^ear  from  that  of  Euse- 
bius,  who  relates  the  flight  of  Themis- 
tocles in  01.  77,  1. 

"3.  But  that  which  forms  the  chief  ar- 
gument, the  whole  series  of  transactions, 
as  they  have  been  recorded  in  accurate 
order,  especially  by  Thucydides,  compels 
as  without  reserve  to  place  the  flight  of 
Themistocles  not  below  tho  j-ear  473. 
Chat  the  expedition  of  the  allied  Greeks 
under  the  direction  of  Pausanias,  against 
Cyprus  and  Byzantium,  the  capture  of 
the  latter  citj',  and  tho  transfer  of  the 
supremacy  from  the  Lacedemonians  to 
the  Athenians,  occasioned  by  the  inso- 
lence of  Pausanias,  fall  in  the  year  477, 
we  may  regard  as  established  beyond 
dispute  by  Clinton,  p.  270  sq.®  The 
view  of  0.  Miiller  (Dorier,  II.  p.  498), 
who  distributes  these  events  into  a  period 
of  five  years,  is  contradicted  by  the  ex- 
pression if  t!'i6£  t!)  iiyt^ovicL  of  Thucydides, 
chap.  94,  whereby  the  capture  of  Byzan- 
tium is  brought  into  the  same  year  with 
the  expedition  against  Cyprus.  That 
these  words  cannot  be  connected  with 
what  follows,  without  a  change  of  the 
text  in  opposition  to  all  critical  authority, 
is  shown  by  Poppo.  Moreover,  the  very 
last  of  these  events  is  placed,  by  the 
unanimous  testimony  of  antiquity,  in  the 
year  477.  Clinton  shows,  p.  249,  that  all 
reckonings  of  the  time  of  the  supremacy 
of  tho  Athenians,  setting  out  from  this 
vear,  differ  from  one  another  only  in  re- 

*  The  gruvmds  arc  thus  briefly  summed  up 
^y  Win.,  p.  252.  "Dodwelli  rationineutiquam 
favet  Isocratis  auctoritas.  Kepugnat  rerum 
pestarum  series,  repugnat  quod  Thucyd.  signi- 
ficat,  I'lutarchus  et  Aristid^s  diserte  traduut, 
repugnat  denique  temporis  spatium,  quod 
Atheuiensium  imperio  assignaut  Lysias,  Iso- 
erates  ipse,  Plato,  Demosthenes,  Aristldes,  qm- 
bus  fortasse  adJ  endus  est  Lycursus." 


■  ference  to  tho  assumed  termination. 
Also,  Thucyd.  chap.  128,  tho  expedition 
against  Cyprus,  and  that  against  Byzan- 
tium, are  connected  as  immediately  suc- 
ceeding each  other.     If,  however,  Dod- 

j  well  were  compelled  by  the  force  of  the 
arguments  to  acknowledge,  that  these 
events,  which  he  compresses  into  one 
year,  do  not,  as  he  assumes,  (p.  61,)  be- 
long to  the  year  470,  but  to  the  year  477, 
he  would  surely  be  compelled,  perceiving 
it  to  be  impossible  to  lengthen  out  the 
thread  of  the  events  until  the  year  465, 
to  give  up  the  whole  hypothesis.  The 
dissatisfaction  of  the  allies  was  followed 
by  the  recall    of  Pausanias.     That   this 

j  belongs  still  to  the  same  year,  plainly 
appears,  partly  from  the  nature  of  the 
case  itself,  since  it  pre-supposes  a  con- 
tinuance of  supremacy,  partly  from  Thu- 
cydides, chap.  95  :  iv  t  oi  t  (o  Si  ol 
AaKc:6ain6i/ioi    jitTSirtnitovTO   Wtixiaaviav   dvax^ 

:  piiovvrs{  cji'  fft/ji    tzvfSafovTo,     Pausanias 

1  having  come  to  Sparta,  and  been  there 
set  at  liberty,  now  betook  himself  privately 

I  in  a  galley  to  Byzantium.     This  cannot 

I  have  happened  long  afterwards,  for  Thu- 
cydides, chap.  128,  immediately  subjoins 
it,  and  what  is  of  the  most  importance, 
Pausanias  finds  the  fleet  still  at  Byzan- 
tium. That  his  residence  there  did  not 
long  continue,  appears  from  the  account 
of  Thucydides,  chap.  131,  that  he  was 
forcibly  expelled  thence  by  the  Atheni- 
ans. He  now  retired  to  the  colony  in 
Troas ;  from  there,  he  was  recalled  to 
Sparta,  after  it  had  been  reported  that 
he  kept  up  an  understanding  with  the 
b.arbarians.  The  Ephori  threw  him  into 
prison,  but  soon  after  released  him.  At 
this  time,  his  intercourse  with  Themis- 
tocles took  place,  who,  being  at  the  time 
already  expelled  from  Athens,  resided  at 
Argos,  and  thence  made  excursions  into 
the  rest  of  the  Peloponnesus.  That  Pau- 
sanias then  for  the  first  time  drew  The- 
mistocles into  his  plan,  when  the  latter 
had  been  driven  from  Athens,  is  asserted 
by  Plutarch,  and  a  personal  intercourse 
between  them  is  rendered  certain  by  all 
accounts.  That  there  was  no  consider- 
able period  between  this  release  of  Pau- 
sanias, and  his  death,  is  clear.  Pausa- 
nias was  not  condemned,  because  there  was 
no  certain  proof  against  him.  It  is,  how- 
ever, psychologically  improbable,  that 
he  did  not  soon  afi'ord  it,  that  he  pru- 
dently kept  himself  from  giving  open 
offence  for  a  series  of  years,  when  we 


400 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538. 


consider  tha^.  he  was  depriverl  of  all  pru-  i  avrov  Aaxc^ai^di/ioi,  Karriyipovi  6'  o[  (pSomvuTSf 
dence  b^"  his  haughtiness,  arising  to  mad- |  rtoi'  jjoXirui')  would  cause  the  decision  to 
ness,  tliat  he  himself  rendered  the  execu-  ^g  hastened  as  much  as  possible.  The- 
tion  of  his  treasonable  plan  impossible ;  |  Q,igtocles,  persecuted  both  by  the  Athe- 
that,  according  to  Thucydides,  chap.  130,  nians  and  Lacedemonians,  now  flees 
he  went  about  in  a  Median  dress,  and  from  the  Peloponnesus  to  Corcyra.  Be- 
caused  himself  to  be  accompanied  on  a  ,  jng  denied  a  residence  there,  he  retires 
journey    through    Thrace   with    Median    to    the  opposite   continent.      In    danger 


and  Egyptian  satellites,  spread  a  Persian 
table,  made  difficult  the  access  to  his  per- 
son, gave  free  course  to  his  passions,  of 
whom  Thucydides  himself  very  signifi- 
cantly remarks,  xal  KarLxciv  ih"  biai'Oiav 
IVK  fihvvaro  dW  tpyoij  0paxeai  -KpoiifiXoK^  a 
ri)  yvuinT]  fiii^oiio}^  c?£t£170  tjuXXt  Trpalav, 
and  of  whose  senseless  arrogance  the 
same  historian,  chap.  132,  gives  an   ex 


of  being  overtaken  by  his  persecutors, 
(Thueyd.  chap.  136 :  koi  iioxoiievog  vzd 
rdv  npoaTCraYfiifU)!/  Kara  Ttiartv  i]  \;fj/)o(r),) 
he  sees  himself  compelled  to  flee  to  Ad- 
metus,  the  king  of  the  Molossians.  Nor 
can  he  have  long  resided  there,  for,  ac- 
cording to  Thucydides,  ch.ap.  137,  he  was 
sent  forward  by  Admetus,  as  soon  as  his 
persecutors  came.     And  how  can  we  sup- 


ample,  even  out  of  the  time  immediately  !  pose,  that  they  would  have  been  long  be- 
after  the  battle  of  Platea.  The  discovery  I  hind  hira?  How  long  could  his  place 
ivas  effected  by  him  who  was  to  bring  to  of  residence  have  remained  a  secret?  It 
Artabazus  the  last  letters  to  the  king.  |  is  expressly  said  by  Thucydides,  that  the 
■\Vilh  what  haste  the  transactions  were  J  coming  of  his  persecutors,  and  the  flight 
carried  on,  and  that  by  no  means  a  space  |  of  Themistocles  to  Asia,  very  soon  hap- 
of  four  years  was  consumed,  is  evident '  pened  (licrrfpov  oO  ttoXXmJ.  It  is  true,  that 
from  the  fact,  that  the  king,  in  order  to  |  if  we  could  credit  the  account  of  Stesim- 
accelerate  them,  had  expressly  sent  Ar-  brotus,  in  Pint.  chap.  24,  we  must  assume 
tabazus  to  Asia  Minor.  His  death  im- 1  that  the  residence  of  Themistocles  with 
mediately  followed  the  discovery  (comp.  i  Admetus  continued  some  months.  For  he 
Thueyd.  133).  "We  surely  do  not  assume  ■  related  that  his^  friends  brought  to  him 
too  little,  when  we  give  to  these  events  a  there,  his  wife  and  children,  whom  they 
period  of  three  j'ears.  That  we  need  not  had  secretly  conducted  out  of  Athens. 
go  beyond  this,  is  shown  by  Ijiodorus,  But  that  no  dependence  is  to  be  placed 
who  compresses  all  these  events  into  the  upon  this,  is  evident  from  the  absurd  fic- 
year  477  (01.  75,  4.)  How  could  he  tion  of  Stesimbrotus  that  immediately 
have  done  this,  or  how  could  such  an  follows,  which,  to  the  surprise  even  of 
error  have  arisen,  if  the  beginning  and  Plutarch,  cir'  ovk  olo  ortojf  cn-iXuSii/itj-oj 
end  had  been  separated  from  each  other  joinjf,  V,  701-  etviiuroicXiu  wouZy  frriXaed/^aoi/, 
by  a  period  of  S— 9  years  ?  How  impos-  I  ^\cwai  ^n<'t>'  k.  t.  X.,)  he  brings  forward, 
sible  it  w.as  for  him,  with  his  sources,  to  i  ^i^i^out  observing  that  the  one  fable  does 
place  the  destruction  of  the  Pausanias  |  j^^^.,y  tjjg  other,  viz.,  that  Themistocles 
far  beyond  this  time,  appears  from  his  ,,.^5  gg^t  ,3^,  Admetus  to  Sicily,  and  had 
fiction,  which  can  in  no  other  way  bo  ]  j^gircj  of  Hiero  his  daughter  in  marriage, 
explained,  of  a  twofold  accusation  of  |  ,,,jth  the  promise  to  bring  Greece  under 
Themistocles.  If,  now,  we  must  place  ,  g^Ujection  to  him.  Plutarch  designates 
the  death  of  Pausanias  about  the  year  1  gtggjm,,,.ot„,  j^s  _.^  gj^a^gj^gg  ij.,^^  p^^.;_ 
474,  and  in  no  event  later,  the  flight  of  ^i^,^  ^^.^^_  jg^  r^hat  the  sons  of  Themis- 
Themistocles  cannot  be  placed  l.arther  ^^gigg  remained  in  Athens,  is  manifest 
back  than  the  year  4(3.  For  Theims-  from  a  relation  in  Suidas,  and  the  testi- 
tocles  at  the  death  of  Pausanias  had  ,^ony  of  Thucydides,  chap.  137,  and  of 
already  been  a  considerable  time  in  the  piu,„rch,  that  the  gold  was  first  sent  to 
Peloponnesus.  His  accusation  followed  Themistocles  by  his  friends,  after  his 
immediately  after  the  event;  comp.  Thu-  arrival  in  Asi.a,  to  enable  him  to  reward 
cydides,  1,  13o;  and  the  combined  in-  ji,g  ggrvice  of  the  captain  who  brought 
terests  of  the  Lacedemonians,  to  whom  j,i,jj  ^o  Asia,  shows  at  the  same  time  the 
nothing  could  be  more  desirable  than  to  incorrectness  of  the  assertion  of  Stesim- 
have  ihe  Athenians  share  their  disgrace,  brotus,  and  confirms  the  opinion,  that 
and  of  the  enemies  of  Themistocles  at  Themistocles  rem.ained  in  no  one  place 
Athens  (Plut.   litem,  c.  23:  Kartpooiv  jiii    of  his  liight  long  enough  for  his  friends 


B.  C.  5S8.] 


CHAPTER  IX. 


401 


to  send  to  him  there  the  necessary  gold. 
Themistocles  was  conducted  by  Aduictus 
to  Pidna,  and  from  there  he  betook  him- 
self in  a  boat  directly  to  Asia.  This, 
accordingly,  since  between  the  death  of 
Pausanias,  and  the  coming  of  Themisto- 
cles into  Asia,  there  could  at  most  be 
only  a  year,  can  at  latest  have  happened 
in  the  year  473,  perhaps  in  474;  and 
even  in  the  former  case,  we  are  com- 
}>letely  justified  in  placing  the  beginning 
of  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes,  which  still  can- 
not have  immediately  coincided  with  the 
coming  of  Themistocles,  in  the  year  474. 

"4.  On  the  supposition  that  the  com- 
mencement of  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes, 
and  the  flight  of  Themistocles,  fall  in 
4G5,  an  extravagant  old  age  must  be  attri- 
buted to  Charon  of  Lampsacus.  Accord- 
ing to  Suidas,  he  was  still  flourishing 
under  the  first  Darius,  01.  69,  504  B.  C. 
Since  now,  in  his  history,  he  mentions 
the  flight  of  Themistocles  to  Artaxerxes, 
this  being  placed  in  465,  lie  must  have 
been  employed  in  writing  history  at  least 
forty  years.  This  is  not,  indeed,  abso- 
lutely impossible  ;  but  in  a  doubtful  case 
it  must  be  rejected  as  the  more  improba- 
ble alternative.  "  Iliston'cecnim  non  sunt 
e.rplicandce,  —  says  Vitringa,  {Proll.  hi 
Zach.  p.  29,) — ex  raris  et  insoleiitibus  ex- 
emplis,  sed  ex  communi  vivendi  lege  et 
ordine.  Si  re9  secus  se  hnbeat,  in  i2)sa 
Jiistoria  ascri/jittir  ne  J'nl/at  incautos." 
Compare  his  farther  excellent  remarks  on 
this  subject.  That  this  argument  is  not 
■without  force,  is  evident  even  from  the 
efforts  of  some  advocates  of  the  false  chro- 
nology, to  set  it  aside  by  cutting  the  knot. 
Suidas,  after  he  has  cited  the  abovemen- 
tioned  determination  of  the  time  of  Cha- 
ron, as  he  found  it  in  his  more  ancient 
authorities,  subjoins,  ^idWou  it  nu  enl  tc3i/ 
n^paiKuii'.  Creuzer,  on  tho  fraf/m.  hiaton: 
GrcFC.  p.  95,  rejects  this  date  without 
farther  examination,  because  it  gives  too 
great  an  age  to  Charon. 

"5.  According  to  Thueyd.  1,  13G,  The- 
mistocles, on  his  passage  to  Asia,  fell  in 
with  the  Athenian  fleet,  which  was  be- 
sieging Naxos.  This  siege  of  Naxos, 
however,  according  to  the  testimony  of 
Thucydides,  chap.  100,  which  makes  all 
other  arguments  superfluous,  happened 
before  the  great  victory  of  the  Athenians 
ca  the  Eurj'medon,  which,  according  to 
Diodorus,  belongs  to  the  year  470,  and 
cannot  be  placed  later,  because  this  was 
the  first  considerable  undertaking  of  the 
34* 


Athenians  against  the  Persians,  the  war 
with  whom  formed  the  only  ground  for 
the  important  requisitions  wln<-h  they 
made  up(m  their  allies;  comp.  Thueyd. 
1,  94.  Hitherto,  since  the  supremacy 
had  passed  over  to  the  Athenians,  scarcely 
anything  had  been  done  against  the  Per- 
sians, except  the  taking  of  (ho  unimport- 
ant yEgon.  Thucydides  also  leads  us  to 
about  the  same  year  as  that  given  by 
Diodorus,  who  connects  the  defection  of 
Thasos  (467)  with  xponco  varefjoi'.  which 
cannot  stand  where  events  immediately 
succeed  each  other.  Even  for  these  rea- 
sons the  siege  of  Naxos  and  the  flight  of 
Themistocles  do  not  fall  after  471.  If, 
however,  we  consider,  that  Naxos  was 
the  first  confederate  city  with  which  the 
Athenians  were  involved  in  discord, 
comp.  Thueyd.  P.  1,  98,  (which,  from  the 
nature  of  the  case,  as  is  rendered  espe- 
cially clear  by  the  remarks  of  Thucydides 
and  a  comparison  of  the  later  historians, 
could  scarcely  have  first  happened  after 
seven  years),  and  if  we  farther  consider 
the  way  in  which  Thucydides,  chap.  98, 
connects  the  events,  from  the  transfer 
of  the  supremacy  until  the  capture  of 
Naxos,  with  one  another,  we  shall,  with- 
out hesitation,  place  the  latter  some  years 
earlier,  in  the  year  474  or  473. 

"  6.  The  flight  of  Themistocles  foils  at 
least  three  years  earlier  than  the  battle 
on  the  Eur3'medon,  because  in  all  proba- 
bility he  was  dead  before  the  latter  event. 
His  death,  however,  must  have  been  some 
years  subsequent  to  his  coming  into  Asia, 
comp.  Thueyd.  chap.  138.  One  year 
passed  in  learning  the  language,  and 
some  time,  in  any  event,  was  required  for 
what  is  implied  in  TaCrrj;  fipxc  nl;  x^Jpaj 
iovTo;  K.  T.  X.  Thucydides  relates,  that, 
according  to  the  account  of  some,  Themis- 
tocles took  poison,  diviiaTOv  vo/iaavTa  eJi'Oi 
iniTzXtani  flaoi'Su  a  vntaxsTO.  This  pre- 
supposes that  Themistocles  was  compelled 
to  fulfil  his  promises,  and  had  this  not 
been  the  case  at  his  death,  the  report, 
that  Thucj'dides  only  in  this  instance  re- 
lied upon  himself,  could  not  have  arisen. 
Plutarch  expressly  connects  the  death  of 
Themistocles  with  the  expedition  of  Ci- 
I  mon.  This  is  done  by  several  writers, 
j  with  the  mention  of  the  most  special  cir- 
cumstance.«,  compare  the  passages  in  Sta- 
veren  on  Kep.  Them.  10,  all  of  which  may 
'  be  regarded  as  they  are  by  Cicero,  Brut. 
I  chap.  11,  and  Nepos,  as  fictitious,  and 
I  yet  the  historical  basis  on  which  alone 


402 


DANIEL 


[B.  C.  538 


every  thing  depends,  the  fact  that  Thu- 
cydides  died  before  the  battle  on  the 
EuryQiedon,  is  firmly  established. 

"  7.  Kriiger,  1.  c.  p.  218,  has  shown 
that  the  account  of  Plutarch,  that  Tlie- 
mistoclcs  reached  an  age  of  sixty-five 
years,  forbids  us  to  place  his  death  be- 
yond the  year  470,  and  therefore  his 
flight  beyond  the  year  473.  According 
to  an  account  which  has  internal  evidence 
of  credibility  in  iElian,  Var.  Hist.  III. 
21,  Themistoeles,  as  a  small  boy  coming 
from  school,  declined  going  out  of  the 
way  of  the  tyrant  Pisistratus.  Assuming 
that  this  happened  in  the  last  .year  of 
Pisistratus,  B.  C.  529,  and  that  Themis- 
toeles was  at  that  time  six  years  old,  he 
must  have  been  born  535,  and  died  470. 
Nor  is  it  a  valid  objection,  that  according 
to  Plutarch,  Themistoeles  was  still  living 
at  the  time  of  the  Cyprian  expedition  of 
Cimon  (449,  B.  C),  and  was  still  young 
at  the  battle  of  Marathon.  For  the  former 
rests  on  a  manifest  confounding  of  the 
former  event,  with  the  victory  over  the 
Persian  fleet  at  Cyprus,  which  is  supposed 
to  have  immediately  preceded  the  victory 
on  the  Eurymedon,  (comp.  Diodor.  11,  CO, 
Dahlmann,  Forschungen,  I.  p.  69,)  and 
the  latter  merely  on  a  conclusion  drawn 
from  this  error.  'AVhoever,'  remarks 
Dahlmann,  p.  71,  'reads  without  preju- 
dice the  passage,  Thucyd.  1,  138,  will 
perceive  that  the  death  of  Themistoeles 
followed  pretty  soon  after  his  settlement 
in  Persia ;  probably  in  the  second  year, 
if  Thucydides  is  worthy  of  credit.' 

"  Until  all  these  arguments  are  refu- 
ted, it  remains  true,  that  the  Messianic 
interpretation  of  the  prophecy  is  the  only 
correct  one,  and  that  the  alleged  Pseudo 
Daniel,  as  well  as  the  real  Daniel,  pos- 
sessed an  insight  into  the  future,  which 
could  have  been  given  only  by  the  Spirit 
of  God ;  and  hence,  as  this  favour  could 
have  been  shown  to  no  deceiver,  the 
genuineness  of  the  book  necessarily  fol- 
lows, and  the  futility  of  all  objections 
agfiinst  it  is  already  manifest."* 

V.  The  only  remaining  point  of  in- 
quiry on  this  verse  is,  as  to  the  division 
of  the  whole  period  of  sixty-nine  weeks 
iato  two  smaller  portions  of  seven  weeks 
and  sixty-two  weeks ;  that  is,  of  the  four 
hundred  and  eighty-three  years  into  one 
oeriod  of  four  hundred   and   thirty-four 

I  ears,  and  one  of  forty-nine  years.     This 
iquiry    resolves    itself    into     another, 

•(Tirist.  11,394— 408. 


whether,  after  the  issuing  of  the  com- 
mand in  the  twentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes 
there  was  a  period  of  forty-nine  years 
that  was  in  any  manner  distinguished 
from  that  which  followed,  cr  any  reason 
why  an  epoch  should  be  made  there.  If 
the  command  in  the  twentieth  of  Arta- 
xerxes was  in  the  year  B.  C.  454,  then  the 
subtraction  of  forty-nine  years  from  tbis 
would  make  the  year  405  B.  C,  the 
marked  period;  that  is,  about  that  time 
some  important  change  would  occur,  or  a 
new  series  of  affairs  would  commence 
which  would  properly  separate  the  previ- 
ous period  from  that  which  followed. 
Now  the  fair  interpretation  of  this  pas- 
sage respecting  the  seven  weeks,  or  forty- 
nine  years,  undoubtedly  is,  that  that  time 
would  be  required  in  rebuilding  the  city, 
and  in  settling  its  affairs  on  a  permanent 
foundation,  and  that,  from  the  close  of 
that  time,  another  period  of  sixty-two 
weeks,  or  four  hundred  and  thirty-four 
years  would  elapse  to  the  appearing  of 
the  Messiah.  It  is  true  that  this  is  not 
distinctly  specified  in  the  text,  and  true 
that  in  the  text  the  phrase  'the  street 
shall  be  built  again,  and  the  wall,  even 
in  troublous  times,'  is  not  limited  ex- 
pressly to  either  period,  but  it  is  also  said 
in  the  next  verse  that  the  period  of 
sixty-two  weeks  would  be  terminated  by 
the  appearing  of  the  Messiah,  or  by  his 
being  cut  off,  and,  therefore,  it  is  fair  to 
presume  that  the  previous  period  of  seven 
weeks  was  to  be  characterized  particu- 
larly as  the  '  troublous  times'  in  which 
the  street  and  the  wall  were  to  be  built 
again.  The  inquiry  now  is,  whether  that 
time  was  actually  occupied  in  rebuilding 
and  restoring  the  city.  In  regard  to  this, 
it  may  be  remarked  (1)  that  there  is  a 
strong  2orobabilit7/  that  a  considerable 
time  would  be  necessary  to  rebuild  the 
walls  of  the  city,  and  to  restore  Jerusalem 
to  a  condition  like  that  in  which  it  was 
before  the  captivity.  AVe  are  to  remem- 
ber that  it  had  been  long  lying  in  ruins  ; 
that  the  land  was  desolate;  thatJeru. 
salem  had  no  commercial  importance  tJ 
make  its  growth  rapid ;  that  there  were 
few  in  the  city  on  whom  reliance  could 
be  placed  in  rebuilding  it;  that  a  large 
portion  of  the  materials  for  rebuilding  it 
was  to  be  brought  from  a  distance;  that 
the  work  was  opposed  with  much  deter- 
mination by  the  Samaritans  ;  that  it  was 
necessary,  as  Nehemiah  informed  us,  in 
building  the  walls,  that  the  workmen 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    IX. 


403 


should  have  a  weapon  of  defence  in  one 
hand  whilst  Ihoy  laboured  with  the  other, 
and  that  those  who  were  engaged  on  it 
were  mostly  poor.  When  tiiese  things 
are  considered,  it  is  at  least  not  improha- 
hle  that  the  period  of  forty-nine  years 
would  be  required  before  it  could  be  said 
that  the  work  was  fully  completed.  (2)  A 
more  material  question,  however  is, 
whether  the  facts  in  the  case  confirm 
this,  or  whether  there  was  such  a  termi- 
nation of  the  rebuilding  of  the  city  at 
about  that  period,  that  it  could  be  said 
that  the  time  occupied  was  seven  weeks 
rather  than,  for  example,  six,  or  five, 
or  nine.  It  may  not  bo  necessary  so  to 
mako  this  out  as  to  determine  the  precise 
year,  or  the  termination  of  forty-nine 
years,  but  in  a  general  division  of  the  time, 
it  is  necessary,  undoubtedly,  so  to  deter- 
mine it  as  to  see  that  that  time  should  have 
been  designated,  rather  than  one  equally 
general  at  the  close  of  one  week,  or  two, 
or  six,  or  nine,  or  any  other  number. 
Now  that  that  teas  the  period  of  the  com- 
pletion of  the  work  contemplated  by  tho 
decree  issued  under  Artaxerxes,  and  the 
work  undertaken  by  Nehemiah,  it  is  not 
dilBcult  to  show  :  (a)  It  is  reasonable  to 
presume  that  the  time  referred  to  in  the 
seven  weeks  would  be  the  rebuilding  of 
the  city,  and  the  restoration  of  its  affairs 
to  its  former  state — or  the  completion  of 
the  arrangements  to  restore  the  nation 
from  the  effects  of  the  captivitj',  and  to 
put  it  on  its  former  footing.  This  was 
the  main  inquiry  by  Daniel;  this  would 
be  a  marked  period;  this  would  bo  that 
for  which  the  'commandment  would  go 
forth;'  and  this  would  constitute  a  natural 
division  of  the  time,  {h)  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  the  completion  of  the  work  under- 
taken by  Nehemiah,  under  the  command 
of  the  Persian  kings,  reached  to  the  pe- 
riod hero  designated,  and  his  last  act  as 
Governor  of  Judea,  in  restoring  the  peo- 
ple, and  placing  the  affairs  of  tho  nation 
on  its  former  basis,  occurred  at  just  about 
the  period  of  the  forty-nine  years  after 
the  issuing  of  the  command  by  Artaxerxes 
Loiigimanus.  That  event,  as  is  supposed 
above,  occurred  B.  C.  454.  The  close  of 
the  seven  weeks,  or  of  the  forty-nine 
years,  would  therefore  be  B.  C.  405. 
This  would  be  about  the  last  j-ear  of  the  '■ 
reigr  of  Darius  Nothus.  See  the  table  j 
above.  Nehemiah  was  twice  Governor 
of  Judea,  and  the  work  of  restoration  which 
he  undertook  was  not  completed  until  his  ] 


being  the  second  time  in  that  office.  Tbo 
first  time  he  remained  twelve  years  in 
office,  for  he  received  his  commission  in 
the  twentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes,  and 
in  the  thirty-second  year  he  returned 
again  to  him.  Neh.  xiii.  6.  This,  ac- 
cording to  the  computation  above,  would 
bring  it  down  to  B.  C.  442.  How  long  ho 
then  remained  with  the  king  of  Persia, 
he  does  not  definitely  state  himself,  but 
says  it  was  'certain  days.'  Neh.  xiii.  6. 
After  this,  he  again  obtained  permission 
of  the  king  to  return  to  Jerusalem,  and 
went  back  the  second  time  as  Governor  of 
Judea.  Neh.  xiii.  6,  7.  The  time  from  his 
first  return  to  Persia,  after  the  twelve  years 
that  he  spent  in  Judea  to  tho  year  405  B,. 
C,  would  be  thirty-seven  years.  Ac- 
cording to  this,  the  close  of  the  'seven 
weeks,'  and  the  completion  of  the  enter- 
prise of  'rebuilding  and  restoring'  the  city, 
must  have  been  at  the  end  of  that  thirty- 
five  years.  In  reference  to  this,  it  may 
bo  remarked  (1)  that  Nehemiah  is  known 
to  have  lived  to  a  great  age  [Josephus), 
yet,  supposing  he  was  thirty  years  old 
when  he  was  first  appointed  governor  of 
Judea,  and  that  tho  time  referred  to  at 
the  close  of  the  'seven  weeks'  or  forty- 
nine  years  was  the  completion  of  his 
work  on  the  restoration  of  the  affairs  of 
Jerusalem,  the  whole  period  would  only 
reach  to  the  seventy-ninth  year  of  hia 
age.  (2)  The  last  act  of  Nehemiah  in 
restoring  the  city  occurred  in  the  fifteenth 
year  of  the  reign  of  Darius  Nothus — ac- 
cording to  Prideaux  (Con.  II.  206,  seq.) — 
that  is,  408  B.  C.  This  would  make,  ac- 
cording to  the  common  computation  of 
chronology,  a  difference  from  tho  esti- 
mate above  of  only  three  years,  and,  per- 
haps, considering  that  the  time  of 'seven 
weeks'  is  a  reckoning  in  round  number.?, 
this  would  be  an  estimate  of  sufficient  ac- 
curacy. But  besides  this  it  is  to  be  re- 
membered that  the  exact  chronology  to  a 
year  or  a  month  cannot  be  made  out  with 
absolute  certainty,  and  taking  all  the  cir- 
cumstances into  consideration  it  is  re- 
markable that  the  period  designated  in 
the  prophecy,  coincides  so  nearly  with 
the  historical  record.  The  only  remain- 
ing inquiries,  therefore,  are,  whether  the 
last  act  of  Nehemiah  referred  to  occurred 
at  tho  time  mentioned — the  fifteenth  of 
Darius  Nothus,  or  408  B.  C. — and  whether 
that  was  of  sufficient  prominence  and 
importance  to  divide  the  two  periods  of 
the  prophecies,  or  to  be  a  proper  closing 


404 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  53ft. 


26  And  after  threescore  and  hvo  |  weeks  shall  ^  Messiah  be  cut  off,  bbut 

"  I.u.  24.  iC,  46.  I  ^  or,  and  shaU  hav-c  nnthinQ. 


up  of  the  work  of  restoring  .and  rebuild- 
ing Jerusnlcm.  What  he  did  in  his  office 
as  governor  of  Judea  at  his  second  visita- 
tion to  Jerusalem,  is  recorded  in  Keh.  xiii. 
7 — 31.  The  particular  acts  \Yhich  he 
performed  consisted  in  removing  certain 
abuses  which  had  been  sulfered  to  grow  up 
in  his  absence  respecting  the  temple  ser- 
vice, by  which  the  temple  had  become 
greatly  polluted  (ch.  xiii.  7 — 14)  ;  in 
restoring  the  Sabbath  to  its  proper  ob- 
servance, which  had  become  greatly 
disregarded  (ch.  xiii.  15 — 22),  and  in 
constraining  those  Jews  who  had  con- 
tracted unlawful  marriages  to  separate 
themselves  from  their  wives  (ch.  xiii.  23 
— 31).  These  acts  were  necessary  to  put 
the  affairs  of  the  temple,  and  the  condi- 
tion of  the  city,  on  its  former  basis.  The 
lait  of  these  acts— the  separation  of  those 
who  had  contracted  unlawful  marriages 
from  their  wives,  is  that  which  designates 
the  close  of  the  seven  weeks,  and  respect- 
ing which  the  date  is  to  be  sought.  This 
is  stated  in  the  book  of  Neheniiah  (xiii. 
2S'i  to  have  occurred  in  the  time  of  'one 
of  the  sons  of  Joiada,  the  son  of  Eliashib 
the  high-priest,  son-in-law  to  Sanballetthe 
Iloronite.'  That  is,  it  occurred  when  Joi- 
ada was  high-priest.  But,  according  to  the 
Chron.  Alc-xandrinum,  Joiada  succeeded 
his  father  in  the  otTice  in  the  eleventh  j-ear 
of  Darius  Nothus,  and  Prideaux  supposes, 
witliout  improbability,  that  this  event  may 
have  occurred  .'is  long  as  four  j'cars  after 
he  entered  on  the  office  of  high-priest, 
which  would  bring  it  to  the  fifteenth 
of  Darius  Nothus,  or  408  B.  C.  Comp. 
Jahn  (Ileb.  Com.)  p.  170—182,  and  Pri- 
deaux, Con.  11.  200—210.  The  time,  then, 
if  this  be  the  event  referred  to,  is  suffi- 
ciently accurate  to  make  it  coincide  with 
the  prophecy — sufficiently  so  to  divide  the 
previous  period  from  that  which  succeeded 
it.  The  event  itself  was  of  sufficient  im- 
portance to  have  a  place  here.  It  was, 
in  fact,  Jiuishiiir/  what  was  necessary  to 
be  done  in  order  to  a  completion  of  the 
purpose  to  'restore  and  rebuild  Jerusalem.' 
It  w  as  in  fact  )Iie  restoration  of  Jewish  af- 
fairs under  the  Persian  edict,  or  what  was 
accomplished  in  fact  under  that  edict  in 
placing  the  Jewish  affiiirs  on  the  proper  ba- 
sis— basis  on  which  tLey  Avere  substan- 
tially before  the  captivity.     This  was  the 


termination  of  that  captivity  in  the  fullest 
sense,  and  divided  tlje  past  from  the  fu- 
ture— orconstituteda;)er/orforf/>t/c//  in  the 
history  of  the  Jewish  people.  It  remains 
only  to  add,  on  this  verse — and  the  remiii 
will  be  equally  applicable  to  the  exposition 
of  the  two  remaining  verses  of  tlie  chap- 
ter— that,  on  the  supposition  that  this  had 
been  written  after  the  coming  of  ii.e  Mes- 
siah, and  it  had  been  designed  to  frame 
what  would  seem  to  be  a  prophecy  or  pre- 
diction of  these  events,  the  language  here 
would  be  such  as  would  have  been  appro- 
priately employed.  Freai  the  time  of  the 
going  forth  of  the  command  to  rebuild 
the  city,  the  whole  duration  would  have 
been  accurately  divided  into  two  great 
portions — that  requisite  for  the  completion 
of  the  work  of  restoring  the  city,  and  that 
extending  to  the  coming  of  the  Messiah, 
and  the  former  would  have  been  made  to 
terminate  where  it  is  now  supposed  the 
period  of  'seven  weeks,' or  forly-nine 
years  did  actually  terminate.  If  this 
would  have  been  the  correct  apportion- 
ment in  a  historic  review,  it  is  correct  as 
a  pro^j/'f^i'c  review. 

20.  And  after  threescore  and  tiro  vcehs. 
After  the  completion  of  the  last  period 
of  four  hundred  and  thirty  four  j'ears. 
The  angel  had  shown  in  the  previous 
verso  wliat  would  be  the  characteristic  of 
the  first  period  of  '  seven  weeks' — that  du- 
ring that  time  the  wall  and  tiie  street 
Would  be  built  in  circumstances  of  general 
distress  and  anxiety,  and  he  now  proceeds 
to  state  what  would  occur  in  relation  to  the 
remaining  sixty-two  weeks.  The  partieu- 
larthing  which  would  characterize  that  pe- 
riod would  he,  that  the  Messiah  would  be 
cut  off',  and  that  the  scries  of  events  would 
commence  which  would  terminate  in  the 
destruction  of  the  city  and  the  temple.  Ho 
does  not  say  that  this  would  be  iunntdiatefy 
on  the  termination  of  the  sixty-two  weeks, 
but  he  says  that  it  would  be  '  after' —  nnw 
— subsequent  to  the  close  of  that  period. 
The  word  docs  not  mean  necessarily  ini- 
mediate/ij,  but  it  denotes  that  which  is  to 
succeed — to  follow — and  would  be  will 
expressed  by  the  word  afterwards.  Gen. 
XV.  14,  xxiii.  19,  xxv.  26,  et  al.  See  Ge- 
senius,  Lex.  The  natural  meaning  here 
would  be,  that  this  would   be  ^he   next 


B.  C.  538.] 


CIIAPTER  IX 


405 


not  for  himself:  and  ^the  people  of 
^  or,  and  thcj  {the  Jews)  sliall  be  n.  more  Jiis 


event  in  the  order  of  events  to  be  reck- 
oned; it  would  be  that  on  wbieh  the  pro- 
phetic eye  would  rest  subsequent  to  the 
close  of  the  period  of  sixty-two  weeks. 
There  nre  two  circuuist.inces  in  the  pro- 
phecj'  itself  which  go  to  show  that  it 
is  not  meant  that  this  would  imnicdi- 
ately  follow:  {a)  One  is,  that  in  the  pre- 
vious verse  it  is  said  that  the  '  sixty-two 
weeks'  would  extend  'unto  the  Messiah;' 
that  is,  either  to  his  birth  or  to  his  mani- 
festation as  such,  and  it  is  not  implied 
anywhere  that  he  would  be  'cut  off'  at 
once  on  his  appearing,  nor  is  such  a  sup- 
position reasonable,  or  one  that  would 
have  been  embraced  by  an  ancient  stu- 
dent of  the  prophecies;  (6)  the  other  is, 
that,  in  the  subsequent  verse,  it  is  ex- 
pressly said  that  what  he  would  accom- 
plish in  causing  the  oblation  to  cease 
would  occur  '  in  the  midst  of  the  week ;' 
that  is,  of  the  remaining  one  week  that 
would  complete  the  seventj-.  This  could 
not  occur  if  he  were  to  be  '  cut  off'  im- 
mediately at  the  close  of  the  sixty-two 
weeks.  The  careful  student  of  this  pro- 
phecy, therefore,  would  anticipate  that  the 
Messiah  would  appear  at  the  close  of  the 
sixty-two  weeks,  and  that  he  would  con- 
tinue during  a  part,  at  least,  of  the  re- 
maining one  week  before  he  would  be  cut 
off.  This  point  could  have  been  clearly 
made  out  from  the  prophecy  before  the 
Messiah  came.  \  Shnll  Jhssiah.  Notes 
ver.  25.  ^  Be  cut  off.  The  word  here 
used — rr^^ — means  properly  to  cut,  to  cut 
off,  as  a  part  of  a  garment,  1  Sam.  xxiv. 
6,  12  ;  a  branch  of  a  tree,  Num.  xiii.  23; 
the  prepuce,  Ex.  iv.  25 ;  the  head,  1  Sam. 
xvii.  51,  V.  4;  to  cut  down  trees,  Dent, 
xix.  5,  Isa.  xiv.  8,  xliv.  14,  Jer.  x.  3, 
xxii.  7.  Then  it  means  to  cut  off  persons, 
to  destroy,  Deut.  xx.  20,  Jer.  xi.  19,  Gen. 
ix.  11,  Ps.  xxxvii.  fl,  Prov.  ii.  22,  x.  31. 
et  n!.  ecepe.  The  phrase  '  that  soul  shall 
be  cut  off  from  his  people,'  'from  the 
midst  of  the  people,'  'from  Israel,'  '  from 
the  congregation,'  &c.,  occurs  frequently 
in  the  Scriptures  (comp.  Gen.  xvii.  14, 
Lev.  vii.  20,  21,  Num.  xv.  20,  xi  t.  13,  20, 
Ex.  xii.  19,  et  (iL),  and  denotes  ihe  pun- 
ishment of  death  in  general,  without  de- 
fining the  manner.  "It  is  never  the 
punishment    of  exile."     Gesenius,    Lex. 


the  prince  that  shall  come  shall  de- 

prnple.  IIo.  1.  0 ;  or,  the  prince's  {JfcssiaJt's,  ver. 
25,)  ftdure  people. 


The  proper  notion  or  meaning  here  is, 
undoubted!}',  that  of  being  cut  off  by 
death,  and  would  suggest  the  idea  of 
ii  violent  death,  or  a  death  by  the  agency 
of  others.  It  would  apply  to  one  ^^•ho 
was  assassinated,  or  murdered  in  a  mob, 
or  who  was  appointed  to  death  by  a 
judicial  decree  ;  or  it  might  be  applied  to 
one  who  was  cut  down  in  battle,  or  by  the 
pestilence,  or  by  lightning,  or  by  ship- 
wreck, but  it  would  not  naturally  or  prop- 
erly be  applied  to  one  who  had  lived  out 
his  daj's  and  died  a  peaceful  death.  We 
always  now  connect  with  the  word  the 
idea  of  some  unusual  interposition,  as 
when  we  speak  of  one  who  is  cut  down  in 
middle  life.  The  ancient  translators  un- 
derstood it  of  a  violent  death.  So  the 
Latin  Vulgate,  occidetnr  cJin'stiis.  Syriae, 
'  the  Messiah  shall  be  slain'  or  put  to 
death.  It  need  not  be  here  said  that  this 
phrase  would  find  a  complete  fulfilment 
in  the  manner  in  which  the  Lord  Jesus 
was  put  to  death,  nor  that  this  is  the  very 
language  in  which  it  is  proper  now  to  de- 
scribe the  manner  in  which  he  was  re- 
moved. He  was  cut  off  by  violence ;  by 
a  judicial  decree;  by  a  mob;  in  the  midst 
of  his  way,  <tc.  If  it  should  be  admitted 
that  the  angel  meant  to  describe  the  man- 
ner of  his  death,  he  could  not  have  found 
a  single  word  that  would  have  better  ex- 
pressed it.  ^i  But  not  for  himself.  Marg., 
and  shall  have  nothing.  This  phrase  has 
given  rise  to  not  a  little  discussion,  and 
not  a  little  diversity  of  opinion.  The 
Latin  Vulgate  is,  et  non  erit  ejus  populus, 
qui  eum  ner/atiinis  est — 'and  they  shall 
not  be  his  people  who  shall  deny  him.' 
Theodotion  (in  the  Sept.)  xi'n  Kpi'/ja  ovk 
laiv  iv  avTM — 'and  there  is  no  crime  in 
him.'  Syriae,  'And  it  is  not  with  him. 
The  Hebrew  is,  I*?  J'XV  and  the  interpre- 
tation turns  on  the  meaning  of  the  word 
JIN-  Ilengstenberg  maintains  that  it  is 
never  used  in  the  sense  of  sS  (not)'  ^ut 
that  it  always  convej'S  the  idea  of  nothing, 
or  non-existence,  and  that  the  meaning 
here  is,  that,  then,  'there  was  nothing  to 
him  ;'  that  is,  that  he  ceased  to  have  au- 
thority and  power,  as  in  the  cutting  off 
of  aprince  or  ruler  whose  power  comes  to 
an  end.     Accordingly  he  renders  it,  'and 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  638. 


Btroy  the  city  and  the  sanctuary ;  and 
the  end  thereof  shall  6e  with  a  flood, 


is  not  to  him  ;'  that  is,  his  dominion,  au- 
thority, or  power  over  tho  covenant  peo- 
ple as  an  anointed  prince,  should  cease 
when  he  was  cut  off,  and  another  one 
would  come  and  desolate  the  sanctuary, 
and  fake  possession.  Bertholdt  renders 
it,  Oiine  Naelifolger  von  den  Seinigen  zu 
haben — 'without  any  successors  of  his 
own' — meaning  that  his  family,  or  that 
the  dynasty  would  be  cut  off,  or  would 
end  with  him.  Ho  maintains  that  the 
whole  phrase  denotes  '  a  sudden  and  .".n  un- 
expected death/  and  that  it  here  means 
that  he  would  have  no  successor  of  his 
own  family.  He  applies  it  to  Alexander 
the  Great.  Lengerke  renders  it,  i(nd 
nicht  iat  vorhanden,  der  ihm  angeliuret — 
and  explains  the  whole  to  mean  '  The  an- 
nointed  one  [as  the  lawful  king]  shall  be 
cut  off,  but  it  shall  not  then  be  one  who 
belongs  to  his  fiimily  [to  wit,  upon  the 
throne],  but  a  Prince  shall  come  to  whom 
the  crown  did  not  belong,  to  whom  the 
name  anointed  could  not  properly  belong.' 
Maurer  explains  it,  '  there  shall  be  to  him 
no  successor  or  lawful  heir.'  Prof.  Stu- 
art renders  it,  "  One  shall  be  cut  off,  and 
there  shall  be  none  for  it"  (tho  people). 
C.  B.  Michaslis,  "  and  not  to  be,  will  be 
his  lot."  Jack,  and  Hitzig,  "and  no  one 
remained  to  him."  Rosch,  "and  no  one 
was  present  for  him."  Our  translation — 
but  not  for  himself — was  undoubtedly 
adopted  from  the  common  view  of  tho 
atonement — that  the  Messiah  did  not  die 
for  himself,  but  that  his  life  was  given  as 
a  ransom  for  others.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  of  that  fact  to  those  who  hold  the 
common  doctrine  of  the  atonement,  and 
yet  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  trans- 
lators did  not  undesignedly  allow  their 
views  of  the  atonement  to  shape  the  inter- , 
pretation  of  this  passage,  and  whether  it' 
can  be  fairly  made  out  from  the  Hebrew. 
Tho  ordinary  meaning  of  the  Hebrew 
word — ]'N' — is  undoubtedly  Jio(/iiHf/,  emp- 
tiness— in  the  sense  of  there  being  nothing  i 
(See  Gesenius,  Lex.),  and,  thus  applied,  j 
the  sense  here  would  be  that,  after  he  was 
cut  off,  or  in  consequence  of  his  being  cut 
off,  that  which  he  before  possessed  would 
cease,  or  there  would  be  'nothing'  to 
him  ; — that  is,  either  his  life  would  cease, 
»r  his  dominion  would  cease,  or  ho  would  | 


and  unto  the  end  of  the  war  »deso 
lations  are  determined. 

=>  or,  it  shall  be  cut  off  by  desolations. 


bo  cut  off  as  the  Prince — the  Messiah. 
This  interpretation  appears  to  be  con- 
firmed by  what  is  immediately  said,  thai 
another  would  come  and  would  destroy 
the  city  and  the  sanctuar}^,  or  that  the 
possession  would  pass  into  his  hands.  It 
seems  probable  to  me  that  this  is  the  fair 
interpretation.  The  Messiah  would  come 
as  a  '  prince.'  It  might  be  expected  that 
he  would  come  to  rule — to  set  up  a  king- 
dom. But  he  would  be  suddenly  cut 
off  by  a  violent  death.  The  antici- 
pated dominion  over  the  people  as  a 
prince  would  not  be  set  up.  It  would 
not  pertain  to  him.  Thus  suddenly 
cut  off,  the  expectations  of  such  a  rule 
Avould  be  disappointed  and  blasted.  Ho 
would  in  fact  set  up  no  such  domin- 
ion as  might  naturally  be  expected  of  an 
anointed  prince;  he  would  have  no  suc- 
cessor; the  dynasty  would  not  remain  in 
his  hands  or  his  family,  and  soon  tho 
people  of  a  foreign  prince  would  come, 
and  would  sweep  all  away.  This  inter- 
pretation does  not  suppose  that  the  real 
!  object  of  his  coming  would  be  thwarted, 
or  that  ho  would  not  set  up  a  kingdom  in 
accordance  with  the  prediction  properly 
I  explained,  but  that  such  a  kingdom  as 
would  be  expected  by  the  people,  would 
not  be  set  up.  He  would  bo  cut  off  soon 
after  he  came,  and  the  anticipated  do- 
minion would  not  pertain  to  him,  or  there 
would  be  'nothing' of  it  found  in  him, 
and  soon  after  a  foreign  prince  would  come 
and  destroy  tho  city  and  the  sanctuary. 
This  interpretation,  indeed,  will  take 
this  passage  away  as  a  proof-text  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  atonement,  or  as 
affirming  the  design  of  the  death  of  tho 
Messiah,  but  it  furnishes  a  meaning  as 
much  in  accordance  with  the  general 
strain  of  the  prophecy,  and  with  the  facts 
in  the  work  of  the  Messiah.  For,  it  was 
a  natural  expectation  that  when  he  came 
he  would  set  up  a  Kingdom — a  temporal 
reign — and  this  expectation  was  exten- 
sively cherished  among  the  people.  He 
was,  however,  soon  cut  off,  and  all  such 
hopes  at  oi;ce  perished  in  the  mirds  of 
his  true  followers  (comp.  Luke  xxiv.  21), 
and  in  the  minds  of  the  multitudes  who, 
though  not  his  true  followers,  began  tc 
inquire  whether  be  might  not  be  the  pre* 


B.  0.  538.J 


CHAPTER   IX. 


407 


dieted  Messiah — the  prince  to  sit  on  the 
throne  of  David.  But  of  such  an  antici- 
pated dominion  or  rule,  there  was  'noth- 
ing' to  him.  All  these  expectations  were 
blighted  hy  his  sudden  death,  and  soon, 
instead  of  his  delivering  the  nation  from 
bondage  and  setting  up  a  visible  king- 
dom, a  foreign  prince  would  come  with 
his  forces,  and  would  sweep  away  every- 
thing. Whether  this  would  bo  the  inter- 
pretation atRxed  to  these  words  he/ore  the 
advent  of  the  Messiah,  cannot  now  be  de- 
termined. We  have  few  remains  of  the 
methods  in  which  the  Hebrews  inter- 
preted the  ancient  prophecies,  and  we 
may  readily  suppose  that  they  would  not 
be  disposed  to  embrace  an  exposition 
which  would  show  them  that  the  reign 
of  the  Messiah,  as  they  anticipated  it, 
would  not  occur,  but  that  almost  as  soon 
as  he  appeared,  he  would  be  put  to  death, 
and  the  dominion  jiass  away,  and  the  na- 
tion be  subjected  to  the  ravages  of  a  for- 
eign power.  ^  And  the  2:)copIe  of  the 
prince  tftat  shall  come.  Marg., '  And  they 
(the  Jews)  shall  be  no  more  his  people  ; 
or,  the  Prince's  (Messiah's)  future  peo- 
ple.' This  seems  to  be  rather  an  expla- 
nation of  the  meaning,  than  a  translation 
of  the  Hebrew.  The  literal  rendering 
would  be,  'and  the  city,  and  the  sanc- 
tuary, the  people  of  a  prince  that  comes, 
shall  lay  waste.'  On  the  general  suppo- 
sition that  this  whole  passage  refers  to 
the  Messiah  and  his  time,  the  language 
here  used  is  not  difficult  of  interpretation, 
and  denotes  with  undoubted  accuracy  the 
events  that  soon  followed  the  'cutting 
off'  of  the  Messiah.  The  word  people — 
Dj — is  a  word  that  may  well  be  applied 
to  subjects  or  armies — such  a  people  as 
an  invading  prince  or  warrior  would  lead 
with  him  for  purposes  of  conquest.  It 
denotes  properly  (a)  people,  or  tribe,  or 
race  in  general;  and  then  (6)  the  people 
as  opposed  to  kings,  princes,  rulers  (comp. 
Xadf  the  people  as  opposed  to  chiefs  in 
Homer,  H.  ii.  365,  xiii.  103,  xxiv.  28) ; 
and  then  as  soldiers,  Judges  v.  2.  Hence 
it  may  be  applied,  as  it  would  be  under- 
stood to  be  here,  to  the  soldiers  of  the 
prince  that  should  come.  <[  Of  the 
prince  that  shall  come.  The  Vfotd.  prince 
here — 1\)3 — is  the  same  which  occurs  in 
ver.  25,  'Messiah  the ptrince.'  It  is  clear, 
however,  that  another  prince  is  meant 
hore,  for  (a)  it  is  just  said  that  that  prince 
—  the  Messiah- -would  be  'cut  o(f,'and, 


this  clearly  refers  to  one  that  was  to  fol- 
low; (6)  the  phrase  'that  is  to  come' — 
Nan — would  also  imply  this.  It  would 
naturally  suggest  the  idea  that  he  would 
come  from  abroad,  or  that  he  would  be  a 
foreign  prince — for  he  would  '  come'  for 
the  purposes  of  destruction.  No  one  can 
fail  to  see  the  applicability  of  this  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Roman 
'  powers  after  the  Lord  Jesus  was  f  ut  to 
death.  If  that  was  the  design  of  the 
prophecj',  or  if  it  be  admitted  that  the 
prophecy  contemplated  that  the  language 
could  not  have  been  better  chosen,  or  the 
prediction  more  exact.  No  one  can  rea- 
sonably doubt,  that,  if  the  ancient  He- 
brews had  understood  the  former  part  of 
the  prophecy  as  meaning  that  the  true 
Messiah  would  be  put  to  death  soon  after 
his  appearing,  they  could  not  fail  to  an- 
ticipate that  a  foreign  prince  would  soon 
come  and  lay  waste  their  city  and  sanc- 
tuary. ^  Shall  destrofj  the  city  and  the 
sanctuari/.  The  '  holy  place' — the  tem- 
ple. This  is  the  termination  of  the  pro- 
phecy. It  begins  with  the  command  to 
'rebuild  and  restore'  the  city,  and  ends 
with  its  destruction.  The  time  is  not 
fixed,  nor  is  there  in  the  prophecy  any 
direct  intimation  when  it  would  occur, 
unless  it  be  found  in  the  general  declara- 
tion in  ver.  2-t,  that  'seventy  weeks  were 
determined  upon  the  people  and  the  city.' 
The  whole  scope  of  the  prophecy,  how- 
ever, would  lead  to  the  supposition  that 
this  was  soon  to  occur  after  the  Messiah 
should  be  'cut  off.'  The  series  of  events 
under  the  Romans  which  led  to  the  de- 
struction of  the  city  and  temple,  in  fact, 
began  very  soon  after  the  death  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  and  ceased  only  when  the 
temple  was  wholly  demolished,  and  the 
city  was  rased  to  its  foundations.  ^  And 
the  end  thereof.  Heb.,  '  its  end,'  or,  '  his 
end' — Vjp.  It  is  not  certain  to  what  the 
word  it  (■()  here  refers.  It  may  be  either 
the  end  of  the  city,  or  of  the  prince,  or 
of  the  prophecy,  so  far  as  the  grammati- 
cal construction  is  concerned.  As  the 
principal  and  immediate  subject  of  the 
prophecy,  however,  is  the  city,  it  is  more 
natural  to  refer  it  to  that.  Ilengstenberg 
renders  it,  'it  will  end,'  supposing,  with 
Vitringa,  that  it  refers  to  the  subject  of 
the  discourse  :  'the  thing — the  whole  af- 
fair— all  that  is  here  predicted  in  this  se- 
ries of  events — will  end  with  a  flood.' 
This  accords  well  with  the  whole  design 


408  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  638. 

27  Ai.ii  he  shall  confirm  the  >  cove- '  nant  Avith  many  for  one  week :  and 


of  the  prophecy.  ^  Vi'ith  a  food. — 
iyu-'3  •  That  is,  it  shall  be  like  an  over- 
flowing flood.  The  word  here  used  means 
a  giinhlrifj,  out  poll  rint/,  as  of  rain,  Job 
xxxviii.  25;  of  a  torrent,  Prov.  xxvii.  4; 
an  overflowing,  inundation,  flood,  Ps. 
xxxii.  6,  Neh.  i.  8.  Hence  it  would  ap- 
propriately denote  the  ravages  of  an  army, 
sweeping  everything  away.  It  would  bo 
like  a  sudden  inundation,  earr.ying  every- 
thing away.  No  one  can  doubt  that  this 
language  is  applicable  in  everj-  respect  to 
the  desolations  brought  upon  Jerusalem 
by  the  Roman  armies.  ^  And  unto  the 
end  of  the  war  desolations  are  determined. 
Marg.,  'it  shall  be  cut  off  by  desolations.' 
Ilengsteuberg  renders  this,  'and  unto  the 
end  is  war,  a  decree  of  ruins.'  So  Len- 
gerke — nnd  bis  onfs  Ende  krieg  %ind  Be- 
schliiss  der  Wiisten.  Bertholdt  renders  it, 
'And  the  groat  desolations  shall  continue 
unto  the  end  of  the  war.'  The  Latin 
Vulgate  renders  it,  et  post  fnem  helli  sta- 
tuta  desolatio — '  and  after  the  end  of  the 
war  desolation  is  determined.'  Prof. 
Stuart  translates  it,  "And  unto  the  end 
shall  be  war,  a  decreed  measure  of  deso- 
lations." The  literal  meaning  of  the  pas- 
sage is,  'And  unto  the  end  of  the  war, 
desolations  are  decreed,'  or  determined. 
The  word  rendered  'determined' — y\n  — 
means  properly  to  cut,  cut  in,  engrave ; 
then  to  decide,  to  determine,  to  decree,  to 
pass  sentence.  See  Notes  on  ver.  24. 
Here  the  meaning  naturally  is,  that  such 
desolations  were  settled  or  determined 
as  by  a  decree  or  purpose.  There  was 
something  which  made  them  certain ; 
that  is,  it  was  a  part  of  the  great  plan 
here  referred  to  iu  the  vision  of  the  sev- 
enty weeks,  that  there  should  be  such 
desolations  extending  through  the  war. 
The  things  which  would,  therefore,  be 
anticipated  from  this  passage  would  be 
(fi)  that  there  would  be  war.  This  is 
implied  also  in  the  assurance  that  the 
people  of  a  foreign  prince  would  come 
and  take  the  city,  (b)  That  this  war  i 
would  be  of  a  desolating  character,  or 
that  it  would  in  a  remarkable  manner  ex- 
tend and  spread  ruin  over  the  land.  All  j 
wars  are  thus  characterized  ;  but  it  would 
seem  that  this  would  do  it  in  a  remarka- 
ble manner,  (c)  That  these  desolations 
would  extend  through  the  war,  or  to  its  I 


close.  There  would  be  no  intermission  ; 
no  cessation.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to 
say  that  this  was,  in  fact,  precisely  the 
character  of  the  war  which  the  Romans 
waged  with  the  Jews  after  the  death  of 
the  Saviour,  and  which  ended  in  the  de- 
struction of  the  city  and  temple  ;  the  over- 
throw of  the  whole  Hebrew  polity,  and 
the  removal  of  great  numbers  of  the  peo- 
ple to  a  distant  and  perpetual  captivity. 
No  war,  perhaps,  has  been  in  its  progress 
more  marked  by  desolation;  in  none  has 
the  purpose  of  destruction  been  more  per- 
severingly  manifested  to  its  very  close. 
The  language  here,  indeed,  might  apply 
to  many  wars- — in  a  certain  sense  to  all 
wars  ;  in  none,  however,  would  it  be  more 
appropriate  than  to  the  wars  of  the  Ro- 
mans with  the  JeAvs. 

27.  And  he  shall  confirm  the  cove- 
nant. Literally,  'he  shall  make  strong' — 
T'3^nv  The  ideals  that  of  giving  strength, 
or  stability' ;  of  making  firm  and  sure. 
The  Hebrew  word  here  evidently  re- 
fers to  the  'covenant'  which  God  is  said 
to  establish  with  his  people — so  often  re- 
ferred to  in  the  Scriptures  as  expressing 
the  relation  between  Him  and  them, 
and  hence  used,  in  general,  to  denote  the 
laws  and  institutions  of  the  true  religion 
— the  laws  which  God  has  made  for  his 
church;  his  promises  to  be  their  protec- 
tor, Ac,  and  the  institutions  which  grow 
out  of  that  relation.  The  margin  reads 
it,  more  in  accordance  with  the  Hebrew, 
'a'  meaning  that  he  would  confirm  or  es- 
tablish 'a  covenant'  with  the  many.  Ac- 
cording to  this,  it  is  not  necessary  to  sup- 
pose that  it  was  any  existing  covenant 
that  it  referred  to,  but  that  he  would  rat- 
ify what  was  understood  by  the  word 
'covenant;'  that  is,  that  he  would  lead 
man}' to  enter  intoatrue  and  real  covenant 
with  God.  This  would  be  fulfilled  if  he 
should  perform  such  a  work  as  would 
bring  the  'many' into  a  relation  to  God 
corresponding  to  that  which  was  sus- 
tained to  him  by  his  ancient  people  ;  that 
is,  bring  them  to  be  his  true  friends  and 
worshippers.  The  meaning  of  the  expres- 
sion here  cannot  be  mistaken,  that  during 
the  time  specified,  'he'  (whoever  may  be 
referred  toj,  would,  for  'one  week' — pur- 
sue such  a  course  as  would  tend  to  es- 
tablish  the  true  religion;    to  render  it 


B.C.538.]  CHAPTER   IX.  409 

in  the  midst  of  the  week  he  shall  |  cause  the  sacrifice  and  the  oblation 


more  stable  and  firm ;  to  give  it  higher 
sanctions  in  the  approbation  of-  the  '  ma- 
ny,' and  to  bring  it  to  bear  more  decidedly 
and  powerfully  on  the  heart.  AV'hether 
this  would  be  by  some  law  enacted  in  its 
"avour;  or  by  protection  extended  over 
the  nation;  or  by  present  example;  or  by 
instruction  ;  or  by  some  work  of  a  new 
kind,  and  new  influences  which  he  would 
set  furth,  is  not  mentioned,  and  before- 
hand perhaps  it  could  not  have  been 
well  anticipated  in  what  way  this  would 
be.  There  has  been  a  difference  of  opin- 
ion however,  as  to  the  proper  nominative 
to  the  verb  confirm — n''3Jn — whether  it  is 
the  Messiah,  or  the  foreign  prince,  or 
the  '  one  week.'  Hengstenberg  prefers 
the  latter,  and  renders  it,  'And  one 
week  shall  confirm  the  covenant  with 
many.'  So  also  Lengerke  renders  it. 
Bertholdt  renders  it  'he,'  that  is,  'he 
shall  unite  himself  firmly  with  many 
for  one  week' — or,  a  period  of  seven 
years,  ein  JaKrsiehend  long.  It  seems 
to  me  that  it  is  an  unnatural  construc- 
tion to  make  the  word  'week'  the  nom- 
inative to  the  verb,  and  that  the  more 
obvious  interpretation  is  to  refer  it  to 
gome  person  to  whom  the  whole  subject 
relates.  It  is  not  usual  to  represent  time 
as  an  agent  in  accomplishing  a  Avork. 
In  poetic  and  metaphorical  language,  in- 
deed, we  personate  time  as  cutting  down 
men,  as  <a  destroyer,  <tc.,  but  this  usage 
would  not  justify  the  expression  that 
'time  would  confirm  a  covenant  with 
many.'  That  is,  evidently,  the  work  of  a 
conscious,  intelligent  agent;  and  it  is  most 
natural,  therefore,  to  understand  this  as 
of  one  of  the  two  agents  who  are  spoken 
of  in  the  passage.  These  two  agents  are 
the  'Messiah,'  and  the  'Prince  that 
should  come.'  But  it  is  not  reasonable  to 
suppose  that  the  latter  is  referred  to,  be- 
cause it  is  said  (ver.  26),  that  the  effect 
and  the  purpose  of  his  coming  would  be 
to  'destroy  the  city  and  the  sanctuary.' 
He  was  to  come  '  with  a  flood,'  and  the 
effect  of  his  coming  would  bo  only  deso- 
lation. The  more  correct  interpretation, 
therefore,  is  to  refer  it  to  the  Messiah, 
•who  is  the  principal  subject  of  the  pro- 
phecy; and  the  work  which,  according  to 
thib,  he  was  to  perform  was,  during  that 
'one  week,'  to  exert  such  an  influence  as 
trould  tend  to  establish  a  ccvenant  be- 


S& 


tween  the  people  and  God.  The  effect  of 
his  work  during  that  one  week  would  bo 
to  secure  their  adhesion  to  the  true  reli- 
yion  ;  to  confirm  to  them  the  divine  pro- 
mises, and  to  establish  the  principles  of 
that  religion  which  would  lead  them  to 
God.  Nothing  is  said  of  the  mode  by 
which  that  would  be  done;  and  anything, 
therefore,  which  would  secure  this  would 
be  a  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  if  it  refers  to  the  Lord  Je- 
sus, this  was  done  by  his  personal  instruc- 
tions, his  example,  his  sufferings  and 
death,  and  the  arrangements  which  ho 
made  to  secure  the  proper  effect  of  his 
work  on  the  minds  of  the  people — all  de- 
signed to  procure  for  them  the  friendship 
and  favour  of  God,  and  to  unite  them  to 
him  in  the  bonds  of  an  enduring  cove- 
nant. ^  Willi  many.  D'3"^'?'  Or,  for 
many;  or,  nnto  many.  He  would  per- 
form a  work  which  would  pertain  to 
many,  or  which  would  bear  on  many,  lead- 
ing them  to  God.  There  is  nothing  in 
the  word  here  which  would  indicate  loho 
they  were,  whether  his  own  immediate  fol- 
lowers, or  those  who  already  were  in  the 
covenant.  The  simple  idea  is,  that  this 
would  pertain  to  many  persons,  and  it 
would  be  fulfilled  if  the  effect  of  his  work 
were  to  confirm  many  who  were  already 
in  the  covenant,  or  if  he  should  bring 
many  others  into  a  covenant  relation  with 
God.  Nothing  could  be  determined  from 
the  meaning  of  the  word  used  here  as  to 
which  of  these  things  are  designed,  and 
consequently  a  fair  fulfilment  would  be 
found  if  either  of  them  occurred.  If  it 
refers  to  the  Messiah,  it  would  be  fulfilled 
if  in  fact  the  effect  of  his  coming  should 
bo  either  by  statute  or  by  instructions  to 
confirm  and  establish  those  who  already 
sustain  this  relation  to  God,  or  if  he 
gathered  other  followers,  and  confirmed 
them  in  their  allegiance  to  God.  ^  For 
one  iceek.  The  fair  interpretation  of 
this,  according  to  the  principles  adopted 
throughout  this  exposition,  is,  that  this 
includes  the  space  of  seven  years.  See 
Notes  on  ver.  2-t.  This  is  the  one  week 
that  makes  up  the  seventy — seven  of 
them,  or  forty-nine  years,  embracing  the 
period  from  the  command  to  rebuild  the 
city  and  temple  to  its  completion  under 
Nehemiah;  sixty-two,  or  four  hundred 
and  thirty-two  years,  to  the  public  appear- 


iE» 


DANIEL 


[B.  C.  538 


to  cease,  and  for    the  overspreading  [  desolate,  even  until  the  consummar 

of  abominations  he  shall  make  it  \  tion,  and  that  determined  shall  be 

,,   ,  ,,,       ,    ,  „,  ,.    .,,,„- 1  poured  upon  the  b  desolate. 

»  or,  vpon  the  batiUmtnts  shall  be  t/ie  idols  of  ,f  i 

tht  desolater.  ioT,desoIater. 


ing  of  the  Messiah,  and  this  one  week  to 
complete  the  whole  sevenfj',  or  four  hun- 
dred and  ninety  years  until  the  '  trans- j 
gression  was  finished,  and  an  end  was 
mude  of  sins,  and  reconciliation  was  made 
for  iniquitj-,  and  everlasting  righteous- 
ness was  brought  in,'  &c.  ver.  24.  It  is 
essential,  therefore,  to  find  something 
done,  occupying  these  seven  years,  that 
would  go  to  'confirm  the  covenant'  in  the 
sense  above  explained.  In  the  considera- 
tion of  tliis,  the  attention  is  arrested  by 
the  announcement  of  an  important  event 
which  was  to  occur  'in  the  midst  of  the 
week,'  to  %Tit,  in  causing  the  sacrifice 
and  the  oblation  to  cease,  showing  that 
there  was  to  be  an  important  change 
occurring  during  the  'week,'  or  that 
while  he  would  be  in  fact  confirming 
the  covenant  through  the  week  in  some 
proper  sense,  the  sacrifice  and  obla- 
tion would  cease,  and  there/ore  the 
confirming  of  the  many  in  the  cove- 
nant must  depend  on  something  else 
than  the  continuation  of  the  sacrifice  and 
oblation.  In  regard  to  this  language,  as 
in  respect  to  all  the  rest  of  the  prophecj', 
there  are  in  fjict  just  two  questions  :  One 
is,  what  is  fairly  to  be  understood  by  the 
words,  or  what  is  the  proper  interpreta- 
tion, independent  of  anything  in  the  re- 
sult; the  other  is,  whether  anything  oc- 
curred in  that  which  is  regarded  as  'the 
fulfilment  which  corresponds  with  the 
language  so  interpreted.  (1)  The  first 
inquiry,  then,  is.  What  is  the  fair  mean- 
ing of  the  language  ?  Or  what  would 
one  who  had  a  correct  knowledge  of  the 
proper  principles  of  interpretation  under- 
stand by  this  ?  Now,  in  regard  to  this, 
while  it  may  be  admitted,  perhaps,  that 
there  would  be  some  liability  to  a  differ- 
ence of  view  in  interpreting  it  with  no 
reference  to  the  event,  or  no  shaping  its 
meaning 6^/  the  event,  the  following  things 
Beem  to  be  clear  :  (a)  that  the  '  one  woek' 
would  comprise  seven  j'ears,  immediately 
succeeding  the  appearance  of  the  Mes- 
aiah,  or  the  sixty-two  weeks,  and  that 
there  was  something  which  he  would  do 
in  '  confirming  the  covenant,'  or  in  estab- 
lishing the  principles  of  religion,  which 
would  extend  through   that  period  of 


seven  years,  or  that  that  would  be,  in 
some  proper  sense,  a,])eriod  of  time,  hav- 
ing a  beginning — to  wit,  his  appearing, 
and  some  proper  close  or  termination  at 
the  end  of  the  seven  years :  that  is,  that 
there  would  be  some  reason  why  that 
should  be  a  marked  period,  or  why  the 
whole  should  terminate  there,  and  not  at 
some  other  time,  {b)  That  in  the  middle 
of  that  period  of  seven  years,  ffxof/ie;- im- 
portant event  would  occur,  serving  to  di- 
vide that  time  into  two  portions,  and  es- 
pecially to  be  known  as  causing  the  sacri- 
fice and  oblation  to  cease  ;  in  some  way 
aflfecting  the  public  offering  of  sacrifice 
so  that  from  that  time  there  would  be  in 
fact  a  cessation.  And  (c)  that  this  would 
be  succeeded  by  the  consummation  of 
the  whole  matter  expressed  in  the  words, 
'and  for  the  overspreading  of  abomina- 
tion he  shall  make  it  desolate,'  &c.  It 
is  not  said,  however,  that  this  latter  would 
immediately  occur,  but  this  would  be  one 
of  the  events  that  would  appertain  to  the 
fulfilment  of  the  prophecy.  There  is  no- 
thing, indeed,  in  the  prediction  io  forbid 
the  expectation  that  this  would  occur  at 
once,  nor  is  there  anything  in  the  words 
which  makes  it  imperative  that  we  should 
so  understand  it.  It  may  be  admitted 
that  this  would  be  the  most  natural  in- 
terpretation, but  it  cannot  be  shown  that 
that  is  required.  It  may  be  added,  also, 
that  this  may  not  have  appertained  to  the 
direct  design  of  the  prophecy — which 
was  to  foretell  the  coming  of  the  Messiah, 
but  that  this  was  appended  to  show  the 
end  of  the  whole  thing.  When  the  Mes- 
siah should  have  come,  and  should  have 
made  an  atonement  for  sin,  the  great  de- 
sign of  rebuilding  Jerusalem  and  the 
temple  would  have  been  accomplished, 
and  both  might  pass  awaj'.  Whether 
that  would  occur  immediately  or  not, 
might  be  in  it-self  a  matter  of  indifference, 
but  it  was  important  to  state  here  that 
would  occur,  for  that  was  properly  a  com- 
pletion of  the  design  of  rebuilding  the 
city,  and  of  the  purposi?  for  which  it  had 
ever  been  set  apart  as  a  holy  city.  (2)  The 
other  inquiry  is,  whether  there  was  rhqt 
in  what  is  regarded  as  the  fulfilmen  of 
this,  which  fairly  corresponds  with  the 


B.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    IX, 


411 


prediction.  I  have  attempted  above  (on 
ver.  25)  to  show  that  this  refers  to  the 
Messiah  properly  so  called — the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  The  inquiry  now  is,  there- 
fore, whether  we  can  find  in  his  life  and 
death  what  is  a  fair  fulfilment  of  these 
reasonable  expectations.  In  order  to  see 
this,  it  is  proper  to  review  these  points 
in  their  order:  (a)  The  period,  then, 
which  is  embraced  in  the  prophecy,  is 
seven  j'ears,  and  it  is  necessary  to  find 
in  his  life  and  work  something  which 
would  be  accomplished  during  these  seven 
years  which  could  be  properly  referred 
to  as  'confirming  the  covenant  with 
many.'  The  main  difficulty  in  the  case 
is  ou  this  point,  and  I  acknowledge  that 
this  seems  to  mo  to  be  the  most  embar- 
rassing portion  of  the  prophecy,  and  that 
the  solutions  which  can  bo  given  of  this 
sire  less  satisfactory  than  those  that  per- 
tain to  any  other  part.  Were  it  not  that 
the  remarkable  clause  in  the  midst  of  the 
week,  he  shall  cause  the  sacrifice  and  ob- 
lation to  cease  were  added,  I  admit  that 
the  natural  interpretation  would  be  that 
ho  would  do  this  personally,  and  that  wo 
might  look  for  something  which  he  would 
himself  accomplish  during  the  whole 
period  of  seven  years.  That  clause,  how- 
ever, looks  as  if  some  remarkable  event 
were  to  occur  in  the  middle  of  that 
period — for  the  fact  that  he  would  cause 
the  sacrifice  and  oblation  to  cease — that 
is,  would  bring  the  rites  of  the  temple  to 
a  close,  shows  that  what  is  meant  by 
'confirming  the  covenant'  is  different 
from  the  ordinary  worship  under  the  an- 
cient economy.  No  Jew  would  think  of 
expressing  himself  thus,  or  would  see 
how  it  was  practicable  to  'confirm  the 
covenant'  at  the  same  time  that  all  his 
Eatrifices  were  to  cease.  The  confirming 
of  the  covenant,  therefore,  during  that 
'  one  week'  must  be  consistent  with  some 
work  or  event  that  would  cause  the  sacri- 
fice and  oblation  to  cease  in  the  middle 
of  that  period.  (6)  The  true  fulfilment, 
it  stems  to  me,  is  to  be  found  in  the  bear- 
ing of  the  work  of  the  Saviour  on  the 
Hebrew  people — the  ancient  covenant 
people  of  God — for  about  the  period  of 
seven  years  after  he  entered  on  his  work. 
Then  the  particular  relation  of  his  work 
to  the  Jewish  people  ceased.  It  may  not 
be  practicable  to  make  out  tho  e.vart  time 
of  '  s£yen  years'  in  reference  to  this,  and 
It  may  be  admitted  that  this  would  not 
bo  understood  from  tho  prophecy  before 


the  things  occurrid,  but  still  there  are  a 
number  of  circumstances  which  will  show 
that  this  interpretation  is  not  only  plau- 
sible, but  that  it  has  in  its  very  nature 
strong  probability  in  its  favour.  They 
are  such  as  these:  (1)  The  ministry  o( 
the  Saviour  himself  was  wholly  among 
the  Jews,  and  his  work  was  what  would, 
in  their  common  language,  be  spoken  of 
as  'confirming  the  covenant;'  that  is,  it 
would  be  strengthening  the  principles  of 
religion,  bringing  the  divine  promises  to 
bear  on  the  mind,  and  leading  men  tc 
God,  &c.  (2)  This  same  work  was  con- 
tinued by  the  apostles  as  they  laboured 
among  the  Jews.  They  endeavoured  to 
do  the  same  thing  that  their  Lord  and 
Master  had  done,  with  all  the  additional 
sanctions  now  derived  from  his  life  and 
death.  The  whole  tendency  of  their 
ministry  would  have  been  properly  ex- 
pressed in  this  language  :  that  they  en- 
deavoured to  'confirm  the  covenant' with 
the  Hebrew  people;  that  is,  to  bring 
them  to  just  views  of  the  character  of 
their  natural  covenant  with  God;  to  show 
them  how  it  was  confirmed  in  the  Mes- 
siah;  to  establish  the  ancient  promises; 
and  to  bring  to  bear  upon  them  the  sanc- 
tions of  their  law  as  it  was  now  fulfilled 
and  ratified,  and  enlarged  through  the 
Messiah.  Had  the  Saviour  himself  suc- 
ceeded in  this,  or  had  his  apostles,  it 
would  have  been  in  fact  only  'confirm- 
ing the  ancient  covenant' — the  covenant 
made  with  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob; 
tho  covenant  established  under  Moses, 
and  ratified  by  so  many  laws  and  customs 
among  the  people.  The  whole  bearing 
of  the  Saviour's  instructions,  and  of  his 
followers,  was  to  carry  out  and  fulfill  the 
real  design  of  that  ancient  institution — 
to  show  its  true  nature  and  meaning,  and 
to  impress  it  on  the  hearts  of  men. 
(3)  This  was  continued  for  about  the 
period  here  referred  to;  at  least  for  a 
period  so  long  that  it  could  properly  be 
represented  in  round  numbers  as  'one 
week,'  or  seven  years.  The  Siiviour's  own 
ministry  continued  about  half  that  time  ; 
and  then  the  apostles  prosecuted  the  same 
work,  labouring  with  the  Jews,  for  about 
the  other  portion  before  they  turned  their 
attention  to  the  Gentiles,  and  before  the 
purpose  to  endeavour  to  bring  in  tho 
Jewish  people  was  abandoned.  They 
remained  in  Jerusalem  ;  they  preached 
in  the  synagogues  ;  they  observed  tha 
rites  of  the  temple  service ;  they  directed 


412 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  53a 


their  first  attention  everyvrhero  to  the 
Hebrew  peopb  ;  they  had  not  yet  learned 
that  they  were  to  turn  away  from  the 
'covenant  people,'  and  to  go  to  the  Gen- 
tiles. It  was  a  slow  process  by  which  they 
were  led  to  this.  It  required  a  miracle  to 
convince  Peter  of  it,  and  to  show  him  that 
it  was  right  to  go  to  Cornelius  (Acts  x.),  as 
a  representative  of  the  Gentile  people,  and 
it  required  another  miracle  to  convert 
Saul  of  Tarsus,  the  'apostle  of  the  Gen- 
tiles,' and  to  prepare  him  for  the  work  of 
carrying  the  gospel  to  the  heathen  world, 
and  a  succession  of  severe  persecutions 
was  demanded  to  induce  the  apostles  to 
leave  Jerusalem  and  to  go  abroad  upon 
the  face  of  the  earth  to  convey  the  mes- 
sage of  salvation.  Their  first  work  was 
among  the  Jewish  people,  and  they  would 
have  remained  among  them  if  they  had 
not  been  driven  away  by  these  persecu- 
tions, and  been  thus  constrained  to  go  to 
other  lands.  It  is  true  that  it  cannot  be 
shown  that  this  was  a  period  of  exactly 
'  half  a  week,'  or  three  j'ears  and  a  half 
after  the  ascension  of  the  Saviour,  but,  in 
a  prophecy  of  this  nature,  it  was  a  period 
that  might,  in  round  numbers,  be  well  ex- 
pressed by  that;  or  the  whole  might  be 
properly  described  by  '  seventy  weeks'  or 
tour  hundred  and  ninety  years,  and  the 
last  portion  after  the  appearing  of  the 
^lessiah  as  one  of  these  weeks.  There 
has  been  much  needless  anxiety  to  make 
out  the  exact  time  to  a  month  or  a  day  in 
regard  to  this  prophec\'— not  remember- 
ing its  general  design,  and  not  reflecting 
how  uncertain  are  all  the  questions  in 
ancient  cbronologj'.  Compare  the  sensi- 
ble remarks  of  Calvin  on  ver.  25. — 
(4)  117(6)1  this  occurred;  icJicii  the  apostles 
turned  awaj'  from  the  Hebrew  people,  and 
gave  themselves  to  their  labours  among  the 
Gentiles,  the  work  of  'confirming  the  co- 
venant' with  those  to  whom  the  promises 
had  been  made,  and  to  whom  the  law  was 
given,  ceased.  They  were  regarded  as 
'  broken  off'  and  left,  and  the  hope  of 
success  was  in  the  Gentile  world.  See 
the  reasoning  of  the  apostle  Paul  in 
Rom.  xi.  Jerusalem  was  given  up  soon 
«fter  to  destruction,  and  the  whole  work, 
as  contemplated  in  this  prophecv,  ceased. 
The  object  for  which  the  city  and  temple 
were  rebuilt  was  accomplished,  and  here 
was  a  proper  termination  of  the  prophecy. 
It  was  not  necessary,  indeed,  that  these 
ihould  be  at  once  destroyed,  but  they  were 
henceforth  regarded  as   having  fulfilled 


the  work  designed,  and  as  being  now  left 
to  ruin.  The  ruin  did  not  at  once  occur, 
but  the  sacrifices  thenceforward  offered 
were  without  meaning,  and  the  train  of 
events  was  constantly  preparing  that 
would  sweep  away  city  and  temple  to- 
gether. I  suppose,  therefore,  that  this 
last  '  one  week'  embraced  the  period  from 
the  beginning  of  the  ministry  of  the  Sa- 
viour to  that  when  the  direct  and  exclu- 
sive efforts  to  bring  the  principles  of  hia 
religion  to  bear  on  the  Hebrew  people, 
as  carrying  out  the  design  of  the  cove- 
nant made  by  God  with  their  fathers, 
and  confirmed  with  so  many  promises, 
ceased,  and  the  great  effort  was  com- 
menced to  evangelize  the  heathon  world. 
Then  was  the  proper  close  of  the  seventy 
weeks  ;  what  is  added  is  merely  a  state- 
ment of  the  winding  up  of  the  whole  af- 
fair in  the  destruction  of  the  city  and 
temple.  That  occurred,  indeed,  some 
years  after,  but  at  this  period  all  that 
was  material  in  regard  to  that  city  had 
taken  place,  and  consequently  that  was 
all  that  was  necessary  to  specify  as  to  the 
proper  termination  of  the  design  of  re- 
building the  city  and  the  temple.  5[  ^'"^ 
in  the  midst  of  the  tccek.  The  word  here 
rendered  'in  the  midst'— ijn — means 
properly  half,  the  half  part,  Ex.  xxiv.  6, 
Num.  xii.  12;  then,  the  middle,  or  the 
midst,  Judges  xvi.  3.  The  Vulgate  ren- 
ders it,  in  dimidio ;  the  Greek,  iv  tu 
hniati.  Hengstenberg,  'the  half.'  So  Len- 
gerke,  die  Hal/te.  Luther,  mitten.  The 
natural  and  obvious  interpretation  is  that 
which  is  expressed  in  our  translation,  and 
that  will  convey  the  essential  idea  in  the 
original.  It  refers  to  something  which 
was  to  occur  at  about  the  middle  portion 
of  this  time,  or  when  about  half  of  this 
period  was  elapsed,  or  to  something  which 
it  would  require  half  of  the  'one  week,' 
or  seven  years,  to  accomplish.  The 
meaning  of  the  passage  is  fully  met  by 
the  supposition  that  it  refers  to  the  Lord 
Jesus  and  his  work,  and  that  the  ^act 
thing  that  was  intended  by  the  prophecy 
was  his  death,  or  his  being  'cut  oft,'  and 
thus  causing  the  sacrifice  and  oblation  to 
cease.  Whatever  difficulties  tb.-re  may 
be  about  the  ^3>-cc(«e  time  of  our  Lord'w 
ministry,  and  whether  he  celebrated  three 
passovers  or  four  after  he  entered  on  his 
public  work,  it  is  agreed  on  all  hands  that 
it  lasted  about  three  years  and  a  half — 
the  time  referred  to  here.     Though  a  few 


B.C.  538] 


CHAPTER   IX. 


413 


have  supposed  that  a  longer  period  wns  I 
jccupicd,  yet  the  general  belief  of  the 
Church  hao  coinciclcd  in  that,  and  there! 
are  few  points  in  history  better  settled. 
On  the  supposition  that  this  pertains  to 
the  death  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  that  it 
was  the  design  of  the  prophecy  hero  to 
refer  to  the  effects  of  that  death,  this  is 
the  very  language  which  would  have 
been  used.  If  the  period  of  '  a  week' 
were  for  any  purpose  mentioned,  then  it 
would  be  indispensable  to  suppose  that 
there  would  be  an  allusion  to  the  import- 
ant event — in  fact,  the  f/rcnt  event  which 
was  to  occur  in  the  middle  of  that  period, 
when  the  ends  of  the  t}'pes  and  ceremo- 
nies of  the  Hebrew  people  would  be  ac- 
complished, and  a  sacrifice  made  for  the 
sins  of  the  whole  world.  •[  He  shallcause 
the  sacrijice  and  the  ohlation  to  ceaie. 
The  word  'he,'  in  this  place,  refers  to  the 
Messiah,  if  the  interpretation  of  the 
forpier  part  of  the  verso  is  correct,  for 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  is  the  same 
person  which  is  mentioned  in  the  phrase 
'he  shall  confirm  the  covenant  with  ma- 
ny.' The  words  'sacrifice'  and  'oblation,' 
refer  to  the  oft'erings  made  in  the  temple. 
The  former  word  more  properly  denotes 
6/(;orf_y  oii'erings  ;  the  \a.lt.CY,  offerings  of 
any  kind — whether  of  flour,  fruits,  grain, 
Ac.  See  these  words  explained  in  the 
Notes  on  Isa.  i.  ]],  13.  The  word  ren- 
dered "  cease" —  nO"'^  — means  properly 
to  rest  (whence  the  word  Sabbath),  and 
then  in  Iliphil,  to  cause  to  rest,  or  to 
cause  to  cease.  It  conveys  the  idea  of 
putti»r/  an  end  to,  as,  for  example,  war, 
Ps.  xlvi.  9,  contention,  Prov.  .wiii.  18, 
exnltatinn,  Isa.  xvi.  10.  Gesenius.  The 
literal  signification  here  would  be  met  by 
the  supposition  that  an  end  would  be 
made  of  these  sacrifices,  and  this  would 
occur  either  bj'  their  being  made  wholly 
to  cease  to  be  offered  at  that  time,  or  by 
the  fact  that  the  object  of  their  appoint- 
ment was  accomplished,  and  that  lience- 
forward  they  would  be  useless  and  would 
die  away.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  so  far  as 
the  divine  intention  in  the  appointment 
of  these  saeritices  and  offerings  was  con- 
cerned, they  ceased  at  the  death  of  Christ 
■ — in  the  middle  of  the  '  week.'  Then  the 
great  sacrifice,  which  they  had  adutu- 
brated,  was  offered.  Then  they  ceased  to 
have  any  significancy,  no  reason  existing 
for  their  longer  continuance.  Then,  as 
they  nover  had  any  efficacy  in  themselves 
35  » 


they  ceased  also  lo  have  any  propriety  as 
types — for  the  thing  which  they  had  pre- 
figured had  been  accomplished.  Then, 
too,  began  a  series  of  events  and  influ- 
ences which  led  to  their  abolition,  for 
soon  they  were  interrupted  bj-  the  Ro- 
mans, and  the  temple  and  the  altars  were 
swept  away  to  be  rebuilt  no  more.  The 
death  of  Christ  was,  in  fact,  the  thing 
which  made  them  to  cease,  and  the  fact 
that  the  great  atonement  Lad  been  made, 
and  that  there  was  now  no  further  need 
of  those  offerings,  is  the  only  philosophi- 
cal reason  which  can  be  given  why  the 
Jews  have  never  been  able  again  to  re- 
build the  temple,  and  why  for  eighteen 
hundred  years  they  have  found  no  place 
where  they  could  again  offer  a  bloody 
sacrifice.  The  'sacrifice  and  the  obla- 
tion' were  made,  as  the  result  of  the 
coming  of  the  Messiah,  to  '  cease' /orei-cr, 
and  no  power  of  man  will  bo  able  to  re- 
store them  again  in  Jerusalem.  Comp. 
Gibbons'  account  of  the  attempt  of  Ju- 
lian to  rebuild  the  temple  at  Jerusalem. 
Dec.  and  Fall,  ii.  35 — 37.  %  And  for  the 
overspreading  of  abominations  he  shall 
make  it  desolate.  The  marginal  reading 
hero  is  very  different,  showing  clearly  the 
perplexity  of  the  translators:  '  Upon  the 
battlements  shall  be  the  idols  of  the  deso- 
later.'  There  is  great  variety,  also,  in 
the  ancient  versions  in  rendering  this 
passage.  The  Latin  Vulgate  is,  'And 
there  shall  be  in  the  temple  the  abomina- 
tion of  desolation.'  The  Greek,  '  And 
upon  the  temple  shall  be  an  abomination 
of  desolations.'  The  Syriac,  'And  upon 
the  extremities  of  the  abomination,  shall 
rest  desolation.'  The  Arabic,  'And  over 
the  sanctuary  shall  therf  be  the  abomi- 
nation of  ruin.'  Luther /enders  it,  'And 
upon  the  wings  shall  stand  the  abomina- 
tion of  desolation.'  Lengerke  and  lleng- 
stenberg  render  it,  'And  upon  the  sum- 
mit of  abomination  comes  the  destroyer.' 
Prof.  Stuart,  'And  the  water  shall  bo  over 
a  winged  fowl  of  abominations.'  These 
different  translations  show  that  there  is 
great  obscurity  in  the  original,  and  per- 
haps exclude  the  hope  of  being  able  en- 
tirely to  free  the  passage  from  all  difficul- 
ties. An  examination  of  the  k-occ/;', how- 
ever, may  perhaps  enable  us  to  furm  a 
judgment  of  its  meaning.  The  literal 
and  obcious  sense  of  the  original  as  I  un- 
derstand  it,  is, '  And  upon  the  wing  of  the 
abominations  one  causing  desolatioa'— 


414 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  538. 


art's  B'XiPy'  f^.a  hyy  The  word  rendered 
overspreading — t])^ — means  properly  a 
tcing — so  called  as  coreriiKj,  or  because  it 
covers — from  r|;3^  to  cover,  to  hide.  Then 
it  denotes  any  thing  having  a  resemblance 
to  a  wing,  as  an  extremity,  a  corner,  as 
(n)  of  a  garment,  the  skirt,  or  flap,  1  Sam. 
x.xiv.  5,  12,  Num.  xv.  38,  and  hence,  as 
the  outer  garment  was  used  by  the  Ori- 
entals to  wrap  themselves  in  at  night, 
the  word  is  used  for  the  extremity  or  bor- 
der of  a  bed-covering.  Deut.  xxiii.  1 ; 
Kuth  iii.  9.  (6)  It  is  applied  to  land,  or 
to  the  earth — as  tho  earth  is  compared 
with  a  garment  spread  out.  Isa.  xxiv.  16  ; 
Job  xxxvii.  3,  xxxviii.  13.  (c)  It  is  used 
to  denote  tho  highest  point,  or  a  battle- 
ment, a  pinnacle — as  having  a  resem- 
blance to  a  wing  spread  out.  So  the 
word  TtTipyiov  is  used  in  Matt.  iv.  5.  See 
Notes  on  that  passage.  It  would  seem 
most  probable  that  the  allusion  by  the 
word  as  applied  to  a  building  would  not 
be,  as  supposed  by  Gesenius  {Lex.),  and 
by  Hengstenberg  and  Lengerke,  to  the 
pinnacle  or  summit,  but  to  some  roof, 
porch,  or  piazza  that  had  a  resemblance 
to  the  wings  of  a  bird  as  spread  out — a 
use  of  the  word  that  would  be  very  natu- 
ral and  obvious.  The  extended  porch 
that  Solomon  built  on  the  eastern  side  of 
the  temple  would,  not  improbablj',  have, 
to  one  standing  on  the  opposite  Mount  of 
Olives,  much  the  appearance  of  the  wings 
of  a  bird  spread  out.  Nothing  certain 
can  be  determined  about  the  allusion  here 
from  the  use  of  this  icord,  but  the  connec- 
tion would  lead  us  to  suppose  that  the 
reference  was  to  something  pertaining  to 
the  city  or  temple,  for  the  whole  pro- 
phecy has  a  reference  to  the  city  and 
temple,  and  it  is  natural  to  suppose  that 
in  its  close  there  would  be  an  allusion  to 
it.  The  use  of  the  word  'wing'  here 
would  lead  to  the  supposition  that  what 
is  said  would  pertain  to  something  in  con- 
nection with  the  temple  having  a  resem- 
blance to  the  wings  of  a  bird,  and  the 
word  'upon' — Sj; — would  lead  us  to  sup- 
pose that  what  was  to  occur  would  be 
Bomehow  vjton  that.  The  word  rendered 
abominations — CSV'?'  — means  abomina- 
ble things,  things  to  be  held  in  detesta- 
tion, as  things  unclean,  filthy  garments, 
4c.,  and  then  idols,  as  things  that  are  to 
00  hel'i  in  abhorrence.     The  word — y^pp 


— shik-hootz,  is  rendered  abomination  in 
Deut.  xxix.  17,  1  Kings  xi.  5,  7,  2  Kings 
xxiii.  13,  24,  Isa.  Ixvi.  3,  Jer.  iv.  1,  vii. 
30,  xiii.  27,  xxxii.  34,  Ezek.  v.  11,  vii.  20, 
XX.  7,  8,  30,  Dan.  ix.  27,  xi.  31,  xii.  11, 
Hos.  ix.  10,  Zech.  ix.  7;  abominable  idols, 
2  Chron.  xv.  8,  in  the  margin  abomina- 
tions ;  dett'.stnble,  in  Jer.  xvi.  18,  Ezek.  xi. 
18,  21,  xxxvii,  23  ;  an  abominable  flth  in 
Nab.  iii.  0.  It  does  not  occur  elsewhere. 
In  most  of  these  places  it  is  applied  to 
idols,  and  the  current  usage  would  lead  U3 
so  to  apply  it,  if  there  were  nothing  in  the 
connection  to  demand  a  different  inter- 
pretation. It  might  refer  to  any  thing 
that  was  held  in  abomination,  or  that  was 
detestable  and  offensive.  The  icord  is 
one  that  might  be  used  of  an  idol  god,  or 
of  anything  that  would  pollute  or  defile, 
or  that  was  from  any  cause  offensive.  It 
is  not  used  in  the  Old  Testament  with 
reference  to  a  banner  or  viilitary  standard, 
but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  might 
be  so  applied  as  denoting  the  standard  of 
a  foe — of  a  heathen — planted  on  any 
part  of  the  temple — a  thing  which  would 
bo  particularly  detestable  and  abomi- 
nable in  the  sight  of  the  Jews.  The 
word  rendered  'he  shall  make  it  de- 
solate'—  Cirt'D — is  'he  making  desolate  ;' 
that  is,  a  desolater.  It  is  a  Poel  partici- 
ple from  a?::'  to  bo  astonished,  to  be 
laid  waste;  and  then,  in  an  active  sense, 
to  lay  waste,  to  make  desolate.  Gesenius. 
The  same  word,  and  the  same  phrase, 
occurs  in  ch.  xi.  31:  'And  they  sh.ill 
place  the  abomination  that  maketh  deso- 
late,' or,  as  it  is  in  the  margin,  ast07nsh- 
eth.  There,  also,  the  expression  is  used 
in  connection  with  '  taking  away  tho 
daily  sacrifices.'  The  word  would  be 
more  properly  rendered  in  this  place  de- 
solater, referring  to  some  one  who  would 
produce  desolation.  There  is  great  ab- 
ruptness in  the  entire  expression,  and  it 
is  evident  that  it  was  not  the  intention 
to  give  so  clear  a  prediction  in  this  that 
it  could  be  fully  understood  beforehand. 
The  other  portions  of  the  prophecy,  re- 
specting the  building  of  the  city,  and  the 
coming  of  the  Messiah,  and  the  work 
that  he  would  accomplish,  are  much  mora 
clear,  and  their  meaning  could  have  been 
made  out  with  much  more  certainty. 
But,  in  reference  to  this,  it  would  seem, 
perhaps,  that  all  that  was  designed 
was  to  throw  out  suggestions — frag- 
ments of  thought,  that  would  rather  hint 


a.  C.  538.] 


CHAPTER    IX. 


415 


at  the  subject  than  give  any  continuous 
idea.  Perhaps  a  luucli  more  abrupt  me- 
thod of  translation  than  that  which 
attempts  to  express  it  in  .a  continuous 
grammatical  construction  capable  of  being 
parsed  easilj',  would  better  express  the 
state  of  the  mind  of  the  speaker,  and  the 
language  which  he  uses,  than  the  ordi- 
nary versions.  The  Masoretic  pointing, 
also,  may  be  disregarded,  and  then  the 
real  idea  would  be  better  expressed  by 
some  such  translation  as  the  following : 
'  He  shall  cause  the  sacrifice  and  the 
offering  to  cease.  And — upon  the  wing — 
the  porch  of  the  temple — abominations  ! 
And  a  desolater !'  That  is,  after  the 
ceasing  of  the  sacrifice  and  the  oblation, 
the  mind  is  fixed  upon  the  temple  where 
they  had  been  offered.  The  first  thing 
that  arrests  the  eye  is  some  portion  of 
the  temple,  here  denoted  by  the  word 
tciiij.  The  next  is  something  abomina- 
ble or  detestable — an  object  to  be  hated 
and  loathed  in  the  very  temple  itself. 
The  next  is  a  desolater — one  who  had 
come  to  carry  desolation  to  that  very 
temple.  Whether  the  '  abomination'  is 
connected  with  the  'desolater'  or  not,  is 
not  intimated  by  the  language.  It  might, 
or  might  not  be.  The  angel  uses  lan- 
guage as  these  objects  strike  the  eye,  and 
he  expresses  himself  in  this  abrupt  man- 
ner as  the  eye  rests  on  one  or  the  other. 
The  question  then  arises,  what  does  this 
mean  ?  Or  what  is  to  be  regarded  as  the 
proper  fulfilment?  It  seems  to  me  that 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  there  is  a  re- 
ference to  the  Roman  standard  or  ban- 
ners planted  on  some  part  of  the  temple, 
or  to  the  lloman  army,  or  to  some  idols 
set  up  by  the  Romans — objects  of  abom- 
ination to  the  Jews — as  attracting  the 
eye  of  the  angel  in  the  distant  future, 
and  as  indicating  the  close  of  the  series 
of  events  here  referred  to  in  the  prophecy. 
The  reasons  for  this  opinion  are,  summa- 
rily, the  following  :  (a)  the  place  or  order 
in  which  the  passage  stands  in  the  pro- 
phecy. It  is  after  the  coming  of  the 
Messiah  ;  after  the  proper  cessation  of 
the  sacrifice  and  oblation,  and  at  the 
close  of  the  whole  series  of  events — the 
termination  of  the  whole  design  about  re- 
building the  city  and  the  temple.  (/>)  The 
la»f/ua<je  is  such  as  would  properly  re- 
present that.  Nothing  could  be  more 
appropriate  in  the  common  estimation 
of  the  Jews,  than  to  speak  of  such  an 
object  as  a  Roman    military  standard 


planted  in  any  part  of  the  temple,  as 
an  abomination ;  and  no  word  would  bet- 
tor denote  the  character  of  the  Roman 
conqueror  than  the  word  denolater—  tot 
the  effect  of  his  coming  was  to  lay  tha 
whole  city  and  temple  in  ruins,  (c)  The 
language  of  the  Saviour  in  bis  reference 
to  this,  would  seem  to  demand  such  an 
interpretation,  Matt.  xxiv.  15:  "When 
j'c,  therefore,  shall  see  the  abomination 
of  desolation  spoken  of  by  Daniel  the 
prophet,  stand  in  the  holy  place,"  >tc. 
There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that 
the  Saviour  refers  to  this  passage  in  Dan- 
iel (see  Notes  on  Matt.  xxiv.  15),  or  that 
events  occurred  in  the  attack  on  Jerusa- 
lem and  the  temple  that  would  fully  cor- 
respond with  the  language  used  here. 
Josephus,  for  instance,  says,  that  when 
the  city  was  taken,  the  Romans  brought 
their  ensigns  into  the  temple,  and  placed 
them  over  the  eastern  gate,  and  sacrificed 
to  them  there.  "And  now  the  Romans," 
says  he,  "  upon  the  flight  of  the  seditious 
into  the  city,  and  upon  the  burning  of 
the  holy  house  itself,  and  all  the  build- 
ings round  about  it,  brought  their  ensigns 
into  the  temple,  and  set  them  over  against 
its  eastern  gate  ;  and  there  they  did  offer 
sacrifices  to  them,  and  there  did  they  make 
Titus  Imperator  with  the  greatest  accla- 
mations of  joy."  Jewish  Wars,  b.  vi.  ch. 
vi.  g  1.  This  fact  fully  accords  with  the 
meaning  of  the  language  as  above  ex- 
plained, and  the  reference  to  it  was  de- 
manded in  order  that  the  purpose  of  the 
prophecy  should  be  complete.  Its  proper 
termination  is  the  destruction  of  the  city 
and  temple — as  its  beginning  is  the  order 
to  rebuild  them.  ^  Even  until  the  con- 
sununation.  Until  the  completion  — 1>'] 
—  '^'r?.  That  is,  the  series  of  events  in 
the  prophecy  shall  in  fact  reach  to  the 
completion  of  everything  pertaining  to 
the  city  and  temple.  The  whole  purpose 
in  regard  to  that  shall  be  completed. 
The  design  for  which  it  is  to  be  rebuilt 
shall  be  consummated;  the  sacrifices  to 
be  offered  there  shall  be  finished,  and 
they  shall  be  no  longer  efficacious  or  pro- 
per ;  the  whole  civil  and  religious  polity 
connected  with  the  city  and  temple  shall 
pass  away.  ^  And  that  determined.^ 
nx^nji.  See  this  word  explained  in  the 
Notes  on  vs.  24,  26.  See  also  Notes  ou 
Isa.  X.  23.  There  seems  to  be  an  allu- 
sion in  the  word  here  to  its  former  use, 
as  denoting  that  this  is  tbe  fulfilment  of 


416 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C    538 


the  determination  in  regard  to  the  city 
and  temple.  The  idea  is,  that  that 
■which  was  determined,  or  decided  on,  to 
wit,  with  reference  to  the  closing  scenes 
of  tho  city  and  temple,  would  be  accom- 
plished. ^  Shall  he  2}our€d.  Tion  .  The 
word  here  used  means  to  pour,  to  pour 
out,  to  overflow — as  rain,  water,  curses, 
anger,  &c.  It  may  be  properly  applied 
to  calamity  or  desolation,  as  these  things 
may  bo  represented  as  2)oi!red  down  upon 
a  people,  in  the  manner  of  a  storm. — 
Comp.  2  Sam.  xxi.  10,  Ex.  ix.  33,  Ps. 
xi.  6,  Ezek.  xxxviii.  22,  2  Chron.  xxxiv. 
21,  xii.  7,  Jer.  vii.  20,  xlii.  18,  xliv.  G. 
^  Ujjon  the  desolate.  Marg.,  desolater. 
The  Hebrew  word — CD^V — is  the  same, 
though  in  another  form  (Kal  instead  of 
Pq?Z)  which  is  used  in  the  previous  part 
of  the  verse,  and  rendered  '  he  shall  make 
it  desolate,'  but  which  is  proposed  above 
to  be  rendered  desolater.  Tho  verb  ECU' 
is  an  intransitive  verb,  and  means,  in  Kal, 
the  form  used  here,  to  be  astonished  or 
amazed ;  then  '  to  be  laid  waste,  to  be 
made  desolate'  (Gcsenius),  and  tho  mean- 
ing in  this  place,  therefore,  is,  that  which 
is  desolate  or  laid  waste — the  wasted,  the 
perishing,  the  solitary.  The  reference  is 
to  Jerusalem  viewed  as  desolate  or  re- 
duced to  ruins.  The  angel,  perhaps,  con- 
templates it,  as  he  is  speaking,  in  ruins 
or  as  desolate,  and  he  sees  this  also  as 
the  termination  of  the  entire  series  of  pre- 
dictions, and,  in  view  of  the  whole,  speaks 
of  Jerusalem  appropriately  as  the  desolate. 
Though  it  would  be  rebuilt,  yet  it  would 
be  again  reduced  to  desolation,  for  the 
purpose  of  the  rebuilding — tho  coming 
of  the  Messiah — would  be  accomplished. 
As  the  prophecy  y?Hrf.s  Jerusalem  a  scene 
of  ruins,  so  it  leaves  it,  and  the  last  word 
in  the  prophecy,  therefore,  is  appropri- 
ately the  word  desolate.  The  interme- 
diate state  indeed  between  the  condition 
of  the  city  as  seen  at  tirst  and  at  the  close 
is  glorious — for  it  embraces  the  whole 
work  of  the  Messiah ;  but  the  beginning 
is  a  scene  of  ruins,  and  so  is  the  close. 
The  sum  of  the  whole  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  verse,  may  be  expressed  in  a 
free  paraphrase  :  *  He,  the  Messiah,  shall 
cause  the  sacrifice  and  oblation  to  cease, 
by  having  fulfilled  in  his  own  death  the 
design  of  the  ancient  offerings,  thus  ren- 
dering them  now  useless,  and  upon  the 
outspreading — upon  the  temple  regarded 
ta  spread  out,  or  some  wing  or  portico. 


I  there  are  seen  abomi.:iblo  things — idola 
'  trous  ensigns,  and  the  worship  of  for- 
eigners. A  desolater  is  there,  also,  coma 
to  spread  destruction — a  foreign  army  or 
leader.  And  this  shall  continue  even  to 
the  end  of  the  whole  matter — the  end  of 
the  events  contemplated  by  the  prophecy 
— the  end  of  the  city  and  the  tempis. 
And  that  which  is  deterraine«l  on — the 
destruction  decreed — shall  be  poured  out 
like  a  tempest  on  the  city  doomed  to  de- 
solation— desolate  as  surveyed  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  prophecy — desolate  at  the 
close,  and  therefore  appropriately  called 
'  the  desolate.' 

After  this  protracted  examination  of 
the  meaning  of  this  prophecy,  all  the  re- 
mark which  it  seems  proper  to  make  is^ 
that  this  prediction  could  have  been  tho 
result  only  of  inspiration.  There  is  the 
clearest  evidence  that  the  prophecj'  was 
recorded  long  before  the  time  of  the  Mes- 
siah, and  it  is  manifest  that  it  could  not 
have  been  the  result  of  any  natural  saga- 
city. There  is  not  the  slightest  proof 
that  it  was  uttered  as  late  as  the  coming 
of  Christ,  and  there  is  nothing  better  de- 
termined in  relation  to  anj'  ancient  mat- 
ter than  that  it  was  recorded  long  before 
tho  birth  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  But  it  is 
equally  clear  that  it  could  have  been  the 
result  of  no  mere  natural  sagacity.  How 
could  such  events  have  been  foreseen  ex- 
cept by  Him  who  knows  all  things? — 
How  could  the  order  have  been  deter- 
mined? How  could  the  time  have  been 
fixed  ?  How  could  it  have  been  antici- 
pated that  the  Messiah,  the  Prince  would 
be  cut  off?  How  could  it  have  been 
known  that  he  would  cause  the  sacrifice 
and  oblation  to  cease  ?  How  could  it 
have  been  ascertained  that  tho  period 
during  which  he  would  be  engaged  in 
this  would  be  one  week — or  about  seven 
years?  How  could  it  be  predicted  that 
a  remarkable  event  would  occur  in  tho 
middle  of  that  period  that  would  in  fact 
cause  the  sacrifice  and  oblation  ultimately 
to  cease?  And  how  could  it  be  conjec- 
tured that  a  foreign  prince  would  come, 
and  plant  the  standard  of  abomination 
in  the  holy  city,  and  sweep  all„,away — 
laying  the  city  and  the  temple  in  ruins, 
and  bringing  the  whole  polity  to  an  end? 
These  things  lie  bej'ond  the  range  of 
natural  sagacity,  and  if  they  are  fairly 
implied  in  this  prophecy,  they  demon- 
strate that  this  portion  of  the  book  ia 
from  God. 


B.  C.  534.]  CHAPTER  X.  417 

CHAPTER  X. 

ANALYSIS  OF  THE  CHAPTER. 

Tnis  chapter  intrnduces  the  last  revelation  made  to  Daniel,  and  is  mcrchj  introductory  to  tho 
ilifolosures  made  in  the  two  t'ollowinj;  chapters.  Tho  ^vhole  extends  to  the  time  of  the  coming 
of  the  .Messiah,  embracing  a  detail  of  the  principal  historical  events  that  would  occur,  and  closes 
with  some  fearful  allusions  to  the  ultimate  results  of  human  conduct  in  the  d.^y  of  judgment, 
aud  to  the  great  principles  on  which  God  governs  the  world.  The  contents  of  this  introductory 
chapter  are  a.s  follows  :  (.d)  the  statement  of  the  time  when  the  revelation  occurred,  ver.  1.  This 
was  in  the  third  year  of  Cyrus  king  of  Persia,  subsequently,  therefore,  to  the  visions  in  tho 
previous  chapters,  and  after  the  order  had  been  given  by  Cyrus  for  the  restoration  of  the  Jews, 
Kzra  i.  1.  ('<;  The  p.irticular  period  when  this  occurred  was  when  Daniel  was  observing  a  fast 
that  continued  through  three  weeks,  vs.  2,  3.  This  was  at  the  I'assover,  the  first  month  in  their 
ecclesiastical  year,  and  the  fast  was  observed  by  Daniel,  evidently,  on  account  of  tho  sins  and 
the  calamities  of  his  people,  (c)  The  place  where  this  occurred,  ver.  3.  He  was  by  tho  fide  of 
the  river  of  Iliddekel,  or  Tigris.  AVhy  he  was  there,  he  does  not  .say.  But  it  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that  he  seems  to  have  been  employed  on  .some  occasions  in  other  parts  of  the  empire  than 
liabylon,  and  one  of  his  former  visions  occurred  on  the  banks  of  a  river  that  flowetl  into  tho 
Tigris — the  river  lilai.  See  Notes  on 'ch.  viii.  2.  Indeed,  it  would  appear  that  the  banks  of 
rivers  were  not  unfrequently  the  places  to  which  the  prophets  resorted,  or  where  they  were  favored 
with  their  visions.  They  were  retired  places,  and  were  on  many  accounts  favourable  for  devo- 
tion. Cjmp.  Kzek.  i.  1;  Acts  xvi.  12.  See  also  Kev.  xxii.  1,  2.  (rf)  While  there,  engaged  in  hia 
devotions,  Daniel  saw  a  man,  who  suddenly  appeared  to  him,  clothed  in  linen,  and  girded  with 
a  belt  of  gold.  Those  who  were  with  him  tied  astonished  and  left  him  alone  to  contemplate  tho 
vision,  and  to  receive  the  communication  which  this  glorious  stranger  had  to  make  to  him. 
The  effect  of  this  vision  on  himself,  however,  was  wholly  to  overcome  him,  'o  prostrate  him  to 
the  e.irth,  and  to  render  him  inscn.sible,  until  the  angel  touched  him,  and  raiscii  him  up,  vs. 
4 — 10.  In  all  this  there  is  nothing  unnatural.  Tho  effect  is  such  as  would  be  produced  in  any 
case  in  pimilar  circumstances,  and  it  has  a  striking  re.semblance  to  what  occurred  to  Saul  of 
Tarsus  on  his  way  to  Damascus,  Acts  ix.  3,  4;  xxii.  7 — 9,  and  to  John  in  the  visions  of  Patmos, 
Kev.  i.  10 — 17.  (e)  lie  who  had  thus  appeared  to  Daniel,  proceeded  to  state  to  him  the  design 
for  which  ho  had  come,  vs.  11 — 14.  The  prayer  of  Daniel,  he  said,  had  been  heard  the  first  day 
in  M'hich  he  had  given  himself  to  the.se  .solemn  acts  of  devotion.  He  had  himself  been  commis- 
Kioned  at  that  time  to  come  to  Daniel,  and  to  disclo.se  the  events  which  were  to  occur.  During 
a  pi  riod  of  twenty-one  days,  however,  in  which  Daniel  Ii.id  beon  engaged  in  this  season  of  de- 
votion, he  had  been  withstood  by  '  the  prince  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia,'  and  h.-id  been  detained 
until  Mich.iel,  one  of  the  chief  princes,  had  interpo.sed  to  release  him,  and  he  h.ad  now  come,  at 
last,  to  make  known  to  Daniel  what  would  occur  to  his  people  in  the  latter  days.  The  nature 
of  this  detention  will,  of  course,  be  considered  in  the  Notes  on  ver.  13.  (/)  Daniel  then  (vs. 
1.5 — 17),  describes  the  effect  which  this  vision  had  on  him,  rendering  him  unable  to  converse 
with  him  who  had  thus  appeared  to  him.  (.(/)  The  heavenly  messenger  then  touched  him,  and 
batle  him  be  of  good  courage  and  be  strong  (vs.  18, 19),  and  then  said  that  he  would  return  and 
fight  with  the  prince  of  Persia,  after  having  stated  that  which  was  'noted  in  the  Scripture  of 
tr°uth,'  vs.  20,  21. 

1  In  the  third  year  of  Cyrus  king  I  Daniel,  ^yhose  name  -vvas  called  Bol- 
of  Persia  a  thing  was  revealed  unto  teshazzar  ;  and  tho  thing  loas  true, 


1.  In  the  third  year  of  Cijru«  king  of  have  occurred  when  he  w.ts  no  longer  .a 
Persia.  In  regard  to  Cyrus,  see  Notes  public  officer,  thougli  the  whole  narralivo 
on  Isa.  xli.  2.  In  ch.  i.  21,  it  is  said  that !  leads  us  to  suppose  that  he  had  not  lost 
'Daniel  continued  even  unto  the  first!  his  interest  in  the  afTair.^  of  the  Jewish 
year  of  king  Cyrus.'  But  it  is  not  neces- ;  people.  lie  may  have  retired  on  account 
sarily  implied  in  that  passage  that  ho  I  of  ago,  though  his  declining  years  would 
died  there.  It  may  mean  only  that  he  !  be  naturally  devoted  to  the  welfare  of  his 
continued  in  authority,  and  was  em- j  people,  and  he  would  embrace  any  oppor- 
ploj-ed,  in  various  ways,  as  a  public  offi-   tuniiy  wliich    ho  might   have  of    doing 

them  good.  ^  ^t  thimj  icon  revealed  unto 
Daniel.  A  revelation  was  made  to  him. 
The  occasion  on  whicii  it  was  done  is  stated 
in  the  ne.Nt  verse.  It  was  when  iie  Wi;s 
earnestly  engaged  in  pra3'er  for  his  peo- 
ple, and  when  his  mind  was  deeply  anx* 


cer,  until  that  time.  See  Notes  on  that 
passage.  For  anything  that  appears,  he 
may  have  lived  several  years  after, 
though,  for  causes  now  unknown,  he 
tntiy  have  retired  from  the  coast  after 
liie  Accession  of  Cyrus.     This  vision  may 


418 


but  the  time  appointed  was  »long: 
tind  he  understood  the  thing,  and 
had  understanding  of  the  vision. 


DANIEL.  [B.C.  634 

2  And  in  those  days  I  Daniel  wal     I 

mourning  three  ^  full  -n'eeks. 

a  great.  h  weeks  of  days. 


ious  in  regard  to  their  condition.  •[  117)o«e 
name  iran  called  Bclteshazzar.  See  Notes 
on  eh.  i.  7.  The  name  Belteshazzar  was 
probably  that  by  whicli  he  was  known 
in  Babylon,  and  as  this  prophecy  was  per- 
haps published  in  his  own  time,  the  use 
of  this  name  would  serve  to  identify  the 
author.  The  name  Daniel  would  have 
been  sufficient  to  give  it  currency  and  au- 
thority among  his  own  countrymen. 
f^  And  the  thing  was  true.  That  is,  it 
would  be  certainly  accomplished.  This 
expresses  the  deep  conviction  of  the  wri- 
ter that  what  was  revealed  in  this  vision 
would  certainly  come  to  pass.  In  bis 
own  mind  there  was  no  doubt  that  it 
would  be  so,  though  the  time  extended 
through  many  years,  and  though  it  could 
not  be  expected  that  it  would  be  com- 
plete until  long  after  his  own  death. 
Perhaps  the  declaration  here  is  designed 
to  bring  the  weight  of  his  own  authority 
and  his  well-known  character  ;  to  pledge 
his  own  word,  that  what  is  here  said  would 
be  accomplished  :  or,  as  we  should  say,  to 
stake  his  veracity  as  a  prophet  and  a  man, 
on  the  fulfilment  of  what  he  had  affirmed. 
Such  an  assertion  7»(^/(<  be  of  great  use  in 
consoling  tho  minds  of  the  Jews  in  the 
troubles  that  were  to  come  upon  their  na- 
tion. ^  But  the  time  appointed  was  long. 
Marg.,  great.  There  is  considerable  va- 
riety in  the  translation  and  interpretation 
of  this  passage.  The  Latin  Vulgate  ren- 
ders it  fortitudo  magna.  The  Greek, 
'And  tho  power  was  great.'  The  Syriac, 
'And  the  discourse  was  apprehended  with 
great  effort,  but  he  understood  tho  vis- 
ion.' Lutiier,  '  And  it  was  of  great  mat- 
ters.' Lengerke,  *  And  the  misery 
(Elend)  is  great;'  that  is,  th«  distress  of 
tho  people.  Bertholdt  renders  it,  '  Whose 
contents  pertained  to  great  wars.'  This 
varietj'  of  interpretation  arises  from  the 
word  rendered  in  our  version  'the  time 
appointed' — N3S,-  This  word  properly 
means  an  army,  host,  as  going  forth  to 
war ;  then  the  host  of  angels,  of  the  stars, 
and  hence  God  is  so  often  called  'Jeho- 
vah of  hosts.'  Then  the  word  means 
warfare,  military  service,  a  hard  service, 
a  season  of  afiliotion  or  calamity.  See 
Notes  on  Job  vii.  1.  It  seems  to  me  that 
this  is  the  meaning  here,  aud  that  Gese- 


nius  (Lex.)  has  correctly  expressed  the 
idea:  "And  true  is  the  edict,  and  relates 
to  long  warfare  ;  that  is,  to  many  calami- 
ties to  be  endured."  It  was  not  a  thing 
to  bo  soon  accomplished,  nor  did  it  per- 
tain to  peaceful  and  easy  times,  but  it 
had  reference  to  tho  calamities,  the  evils, 
and  the  hardships  of  wars: — wars  at- 
tended with  the  evils  to  which  they  are 
usually  incident,  and  which  were  to  be 
conducted  on  a  great  scale.  This  inter- 
pretation will  accord  with  the  details  in 
the  following  chapters.  ^  And  he  under- 
stood the  thing,  &c.  This  seems  to  be  said 
in  contradistinction  to  what  had  occurred 
on  some  other  occasions  when  the  mean- 
ing of  the  vision  which  he  saw  was  con- 
cealed from  him.  Of  this  he  says  he  had 
full  understanding.  The  prophecy  was, 
in  fact,  more  clearly  expressed  than  had 
been  usual  in  the  revelations  made  to 
Daniel,  for  this  is  almost  entirely  a  his- 
torical narrative,  and  there  could  be  little 
doubt  as  to  its  meaning. 

2.  In  those  daijs  I  Daniel  was  mourning. 
I  was  afflicting  myself;  that  is,  he  had 
set  apart  this  time  as  an  extraordinary 
fast.  He  was  sad  and  troubled.  He  does 
not  say  on  what  account  he  was  thus 
troubled,  but  there  can  be  little  doubt 
that  it  was  on  account  of  his  people. 
This  was  two  years  after  the  order  had 
been  given  by  Cyrus  for  the  restora- 
tion of  the  Hebrew  people  to  their  coun- 
try, but  it  is  not  improbable  that  they 
met  with  many  embarrassments  in  their 
efforts  to  return,  and  possibly  there  may 
have  sprung  up  in  Babylon  some  diffi- 
culties on  the  subject  that  greatly  affected 
the  mind  of  Daniel.  Tho  difficulties  at- 
tending such  an  enterprise  as  that  of  re- 
storing a  captured  people  to  their  country, 
when  the  march  lay  across  a  vast  desert, 
would  at  any  time  have  been  such  as  to 
have  made  an  extraordinary  season  of 
prayer  and  fasting  proper.  *|  Three  full 
weeks.  Marg.,  weeks  of  days.  Heb., 
'  Three  sevens  of  days.'  lie  does  not  say 
whether  he  had  designedly  set  apart  that 
time  to  be  occupied  as  a  season  of  fasting, 
or  whether  he  had,  under  the  influence 
of  deep  feeling,  continued  his  fast  from 
day  to  day  until  it  reached  that  period. 
Either  supposition  will  accord  with  the 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER    X. 


419 


3  I  ate  no  •  pleasant  bread,  nei- 
ther came  flesh  nor  wine  in  my 
mouth,  neither  did  I  anoint  myself 
at  all,  till  three  whole  weeks  were 
fulfilled. 

*  bread  of  desires.  "one. 


circumstances  of  the  case,  and  either 
would  have  justified  such  an  act  at  any 
time,  for  it  would  be  undoubtedly  proper 
to  designate  a  time  of  extraordinary  de- 
votion, or,  under  the  influence  of  deep 
feeling,  of  domestic  trouble,  of  national 
aiflietion,  to  continue  such  religious  ex- 
ercises from  day  to  day. 

S.  I  ate  no  pleasant  bread.  Mnrg.,  bread 
of  desires.  So  the  Hebrew.  The  mean- 
ing is,  that  he  abstained  from  ordinary 
food,  and  partook  of  that  only  which  was 
coarse  and  disagreeable.  ^  Neither  came 
flesh  nor  wine  in  my  month.  That  is,  he 
lived  on  bre.ad  or  vegetables.  It  is  not 
to  be  inferred  from  this  that  Daniel  ordi- 
narily made  use  of  wine,  for  it  would 
seem  from  chapter  i.  that  that  was  not  his 
custom.  What  would  appear  from  this 
passage  would  be,  that  he  practised  on 
this  occasion  the  most  rigid  abstinence. 
^  Neither  did  I  anoint  myself.  The  use 
of  unguents  was  common  in  the  East, 
(See  Notes  on  Matt.  vi.  17),  and  Daniel 
here  says  that  he  abstained  during  these 
three  weeks  from  that  which  he  ordina- 
rily observed  as  promoting  his  personal 
comfort.  He  gave  himself  up  to  a  course 
of  life  which  would  be  expressive  of  deep 
grief.  Nature  prompts  to  this  when  the 
mind  is  overwhelmed  with  sorrow.  Not 
only  do  we  become  indifferent  to  our  food, 
but  it  requires  an  effort  not  to  be  indiffer- 
3nt  to  our  dress,  and  to  our  personal  ap- 
pearance. 

4.  And  in  the  four  and  twentieth  day  of 
the  first  month.  At  the  close  of  his  sea- 
son of  fasting.  Though  he  had  not  set 
apart  this  season  of  fasting  with  any 
view  or  expectation  that  it  would  be  fol- 
lowed by  such  a  result,  yet  there  was 
a  propriety  that  an  occasion  like  this 
should  be  selected  as  that  on  which  the 
communication  which  follows  should  be 
made  to  his  mind;  for  (a)  his  mind  was 
in  a  prepared  state  by  this  extraordinary 
season  of  devotion,  for  such  a  communi- 
cation ;  and  (6)  his  attention  during  that 
period  had  been  turned  towards  the  con- 
dition of  his  people,  and  it  was  a  fit  op- 
portunitj  to  impart  to  him  these  eztraor- 


4  And  in  the  f  r>ur  and  twentieth 
day  of  the  first  month,  as  I  was  by 
the  side  of  the  great  river,  which  is 
Hiddekel  ; 

5  Then  I  lifted  up  mine  eyes,  and 
looked,  and  behold  ^  a  certain  man 

dinary  views  of  whatwoull  occur  to  thcra 
in  future  days.  It  may  be  added,  that 
we  shall  bo  more  likely  to  receive  divine 
communications  to  our  souls  at  the  closa 
of  seasons  of  sincere  and  prolonged  devo- 
tion than  at  other  times,  and  that,  though 
we  may  set  npart  such  seasons  for  difl'or- 
ent  purposes,  the  Spirit  of  God  may  tiika 
occasion  from  them  to  impart  to  us  clear 
and  elevated  views  of  divine  truth,  and  of 
the  divine  government.  A  man  is  in  a 
better  state  to  obtain  such  views,  and  is 
more  likely  to  obtain  them,  in  such  cir- 
cumstances than  ho  is  in  others,  and  he 
who  desires  to  understand  God  and  his 
ways  should  wait  upon  him  with  intense 
and  prolonged  devotion.  The  time  hero 
specified  is  the  '  first  month' — the  month 
Nisan,  answering  to  Ji  part  of  our  month 
April.  This  was  the  month  in  which  the 
Passover  was  celebrated,  and  was  a  time, 
therefore,  which  a  Jew  would  be  likely 
to  select  as  a  season  of  extraordinary  de- 
votion. It  was,  for  some  reason,  very 
common  for  the  prophets  to  record  the 
very  day  on  which  the  visions  which  they 
saw  appeared  to  them,  or  on  which  divine 
communications  were  made  to  them. 
This  was  often  of  importance,  because  it 
served  to  determine  the  time  when  a  pro- 
phecy was  fulfilled.  ^  F  was  by  the  side 
of  the  great  river,  which,  is  Hiddekel. 
That  is,  the  Tigris.  The  Syriac  renders 
it  the  Euphrates.  The  name  in  tho 
Scriptures,  however,  denotes  the  Tigris. 
Why  Daniel  was  there  he  does  not  say. 
He  was  often  away  from  Babylon  (Comp. 
Notes  on  ch.  vii.  2  ),  and  he  may  have 
been  now  among  some  of  his  people  who 
resided  near  the  Tigris.  Possibly  he  may 
at  that  time  have  ceased  to  reside  at  the 
court  in  Babylon,  and  have  taken  up  his 
residence  in  some  place  on  the  Tigris. 
See  Notes  on  verse  1. 

5.  Then  I  lifted,  up  mine  eyes,  and 
looked,  &c.  While  he  was  engaged  ir 
devotion.  What  is  here  said  would  lead 
us  to  suppose  that  he  had  been  occupied 
in  deep  thought  and  meditation,  perhaps 
with  his  eyes  fixed  on  the  ground,  f^  Be. 
hold  a  certain  man  clothed  in  linen.     On* 


m 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  534. 


clothed  in  linen,  -whose  loins  were 
girded  -with  fine  gold  of  Uphaz. 

6  His  body  =  also  ivas  like  the 
beryl,  and  his  face  as  the  appear- 

■who  had  the  form  and  appearance  of  a 
man.  The  subsequent  disclosures  showed 
that  he  was  an  angel,  but  when  angels 
have  appeared  on  earth  they  have  com- 
monly assumed  the  human  form.  The 
margin  is,  'one.'  So  also  is  the  Hebrew 
'  one  man.'  From  eh.  xii.  6,  it  would 
seem  that  two  other  such  beings  appeared 
in  the  course  of  the  vision,  but  either  one 
only  wa3  manifest  now  to  Daniel,  or  his 
attention  was  particularly  directed  to 
him.  The  name  of  this  celestial  messen- 
ger is  not  given,  but  all  the  circumstances 
of  the  case  lead  us  to  suppose  that  it  was 
the  same  who  had  appeared  to  him  on 
the  banks  of  the  Ulai,  (ch.  viii.  IG),  and 
the  same  who  had  made  the  revelation 
of  the  seventy  weeks,  ch.  ix.  21,  seq. 
Linen  was  the  common  raiment  of  priests, 
because  it  was  supposed  to  be  more  pure 
than  wool,  Ex.  xxviii.  42;  Lev.  vi.  10; 
xvi.  4,  23  ;  1  Sam.  ii.  IS.  It  was  also 
worn  by  prophets,  Jer.  xiii.  1,  and  is  re- 
presented as  the  raiment  of  angels,  Kev. 
XV.  6.  The  nature  of  the  raiment  would 
suggest  the  idea  at  once  that  this  person 
thus  appearing  was  one  sustaining  a 
saintly  character.  ^  Whose  loins  were 
girded  with  fine  gold  of  Uphaz.  With  a 
girdle  made  of  fine  gold  ;  that  is,  proba- 
bly, it  was  made  of  something  in  which 
fine  gold  was  interwoven  so  as  to  give  it 
the  appearance  of  pure  gold.  It  was  cus- 
tomary at  the  East,  as  it  is  now,  to  wear 
a  girdle  around  the  loins.  See  Notes  on 
Matt.  V.  38.  These  girdles  are  often 
made  of  rich  material,  and  are  highly 
ornamented.  Comp.  Notes  on  Rev.  i.  13. 
Nothing  is  known  of  Uphaz,  unless,  as 
3esenius  supposes,  the  word  is  a  corrup- 
tion of  Ophir,  made  by  a  change  of  a 
single  letter — j  for  i.  Ophir  was  cele- 
brated for  its  gold,  but  its  situation  is 
unknown.     See  Notes  on  Job  xxii.  24. 

6.  Hia  hody  also  was  like  the  beryl. 
There  is  a  very  striking  resemblance  be- 
tween the  description  here  given  and 
that  of  the  Saviour  as  he  appeared  to 
John  in  Patmos,  Rev.  i.  13— Ifi.  See 
Notes  on  that  passage  It  contains,  how- 
ever, no  description  C'f  the  appearance  of 
the  body.  Beryl  is  "a  mineral  of  great 
bardness,  occurring  in  green,  and  bluish- 


ance  of  lightning,  and  his  eyes  as 
lamps  of  fire,  and  his  arms  and  his 
feet  like  in  colour  to  polished  brass, 

»  Re.  1.  13—17. 


green  six  sided  prisms.  It  is  identical 
with  the  emerald,  except  that  the  latter 
has  a  purer  and  richer  colour."  Dana, 
in  AVebster's  Die.  The  Hebrew  word 
here  used  is  U'ir-i.n  —  Tarsh  ish —  Tarteasua, 
and  properly  refers  to  a  country,  sup- 
posed to  bo  on  the  south  of  Spain,  a 
place  where  this  mineral  was  probably 
found.  This  was  situated  between  the 
mouth  of  the  river  Bajtis,  or  Guadal- 
quiver,  and  was  a  flourishing  mart  of  the 
Phoenicians,  Gen.  X.  4;  Ps.  Ixxii.  10;  Isa. 
xxiii.  1,  6,  10,  &c.  Gesenius.  The  name 
was  given  to  this  gem  because  it  was 
brought  from  that  place.  The  true  mean- 
ing of  the  word,  as  applied  to  a  gem,  is 
supposed  to  be  the  chrj'solite,  that  is,  the 
topaz  of  the  moderns.  '' Tarshish,  the 
Chrysolith,"  says  Rosenmiiller  (Miner- 
alogy and  Botany  of  the  Bible,  pp.  38, 
39,)  "is  a  chrystalline  precious  stone  of 
the  quartz  kind,  of  a  glassy  fracture. 
The  prevailing  colour  is  yellowish  green, 
and  pistachiogreen  of  every  variety  and 
degree  of  shade,  but  always  with  a  yel- 
low and  gold  lustre.  It  is  completely 
diaphonous,  and  has  a  strong  double  re- 
fraction. Most  commonly  the  chrysolite 
is  found  solid  and  in  grains,  or  in  angu- 
lar pieces.  The  Hebrew  word  Tarshish 
denotes  the  south  of  Spain,  the  Tartessus 
of  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  a  place  to 
which  the  Phoenicians  traded  even  in  the 
earliest  ages.  Probably  the  Phoenicians 
first  brought  the  chrysolith  from  Spain 
to  Syria,  and  it  was  on  that  account 
called  Tarshish  Stone."  ^  And  his  face 
as  the  appearance  of  lightning.  Bright, 
shining.  In  Rev.  i.  16,  it  is,  "and  his 
countenance  was  as  the  sun  shineth  in 
his  strength."  See  Notes  on  that  pas- 
sage. ^  And  his  eyes  as  laynps  of  fire. 
Keen,  penetrating.  So  Rev.  i.  14  :  "  His 
eyes  were  as  a  flame  of  fire."  IT  And  his 
arms  and  his  feet  like  in  colour  to  jyol- 
ished  brass.  So  in  Rev.  i.  15  :  '"And  his 
feet  like  unto  fine  brass,  as  if  they  burned 
in  a  furnace."  See  Notes  on  that  pas- 
sage. The  meaning  is,  that  they  were 
bright — like  burnished  metal.  The  He- 
brew here  is,  '  like  the  eye  of  brnss  ;' 
then,  as  the  word  e_ye  comes  to  denot* 
the  face  or  countenance,  the  meaning  it. 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER  X. 


421 


aud  the  voice  of  his  words  like  the 
voice  of  a  multitude. 

7  And  I  Daniel  alone  saw  the  vi- 
sion :  for  the  men  that  were  witli 
me  saw  not  the  vision  ;  but  a  great 
quaking  fell  upon  them,  so  that  they 
fled  to  hide  themselves. 

8  Therefore  I  was  left  alone,  and 
saw  this  great  vision,  and  there  re- 
mained no  strength  in  me  :  for  my 


'like  the  face  or  appearance  of  brass.' 
Comp.  Ex.  X.  5,  15;  Xum.  xxii.  5,  11. 
It  is  easy  to  conceive  of  tlie  appearance 
which  one  would  make  whose  arms  and 
feet  resembled  burnished  brass.  ^,  And 
the  voice  of  his  words  like  the  voice  of  a 
tmdtitude.  A  multitude  of  people — loud 
and  strong.  So  in  Rev.  i.  15 :  "  And  his 
voice  as  the  sound  of  many  waters." 

7.  And  f  Daniel  alone  saw  the  vision. 
That  is,  he  only  saw  it  distinct!}'.  The 
others  who  were  with  him,  appear  to 
have  seen  or  heard  something  which 
alarmed  them,  and  they  fled.  Who  those 
men  were,  or  why  they  were  with  him, 
he  does  not  say.  They  may  have  been 
his  own  countrymen,  engaged  with  him 
in  the  act  of  devotion,  or  they  may  have 
been  Babylonians  occupied  in  the  public 
service  ;  but  whoever  they  were,  or  what- 
ever was  the  reason  why  they  were  there, 
they  became  alarmed  and  fled.  The  case 
was  somewhat  different  with  the  com- 
panions of  Saul  of  Tarsus  when  the  Sa- 
viour appeared  to  him  on  his  way  to 
Damascus.  These  saw  the  light ;  they 
all  fell  to  the  earth  together,  but  Saul 
only  heard  the  voice  of  him  that  spake, 
Acts  xxii.  9. 

8.  Therefore  I  loas  left  alone,  and  saw 
this  great  vision.  That  is,  I  distinctly 
saw  it,  or  contemplated  it.  lie  perceived 
doubtless  that  it  was  a  heavenly  vision, 
and  as  he  had  often  been  favoured  with 
similar  manifestations,  he  remained  to 
receive  the  communication  which  proba- 
bly he  understood  was  to  be  made.  ^  And 
there  remained  no  strenr/th  in  me.  He 
was  completely  overcome.  A  similar 
eff"ect  was  produced  on  John  when  he  was  , 
in  Patmos  :  "And  when  I  saw  him,  I 
fell  at  his  feet  as  dead,"  Ilev.  i.  17.  That 
he  should  be  overcome,  and  his  strength 
taken  awa}',  was  not  an  unnatural  efi"ect  ; 
and  what  occurred  to  Daniel  and  John 
nay  demonstrate  that  there  viay  be  such  i 
36 


» comeliness  was  turned  in  me  in- 
to corruption,  and  I  retained  no 
strength. 

9  Yet  heard  I  the  voice  of  his 
words:  and  when  I  heard  the  voico 
of  his  words,  then  was  I  in  a  deep 
sleep  on  my  face,  and  my  face  to- 
wards the  ground. 

a  or,  vigour. 


views  of  the  divine  character  and  glory 
now  as  to  prostrate  our  physical  powers. 
It  is  certain  that  such  visions  as  those 
which  appeared  to  Daniel  and  John  would 
have  this  effect;  and,  though  we  are  not 
to  expect  that  they  will  now  be  vouch- 
safed to  men,  no  one  can  doubt  that  there 
ma;i  be  such  views  of  God,  and  heaven, 
and  eternal  realities  presented  to  the  eye 
of  faith  and  hope;  such  joy  in  the  evi- 
dence of  pardoned  sin;  such  a  change 
from  a  sense  of  condemnation  to  the  peace 
resulting  from  forgiveness,  that  the  pow- 
ers of  the  body  may  be  prostrated,  and 
sink  from  exhaustion.  Indeed,  it  is  not 
much  of  the  revelation  of  the  divine  cha- 
racter  that  in  our  present  state  we  can 
bear.  ^  For  mi/  comeliness.  Marg., 
vigour.  Ileb.  ii^i — lu'dh.  The  word 
means,  properly,  majesty,  or  splendour ; 
then  beauty  or  brightness,  as  of  the  com- 
plexion. The  meaning  here  is,  that  his 
'  bright  complexion'  (Gesenius,  Lex.),  was 
changed  upon  him ;  that  is,  that  he  turned 
pale.  ^  Into  corruption.  The  phrase 
here  used  means  literally  'into  destruc- 
tion.' The  sense  is,  that  by  the  change 
that  came  over  him,  his  beauty — his 
bright  or  florid  complexion  was  com- 
pletely destroyed.  He  became  deadly 
pale. 

9.  Yet  heard  I  the  voice  of  his  tcords. 
What  the  angel  said  when  he  appeared 
to  him,  Daniel  has  not  recorded.  He 
says  (ver.  6)  that  the  voice  of  his  words 
was  'as  the  voice  of  a  multitude.'  It  is 
probable  that  those  who  were  with  him 
had  heard  that  voice,  and  hearing  it,  and 
being  struck  with  the  remarkable  charac- 
ter of  the  vision,  they  had  suddenly  fled 
in  alarm.  Daniel  heard  more  distinctly 
what  ho  said,  though  it  does  not  yet  ap- 
pear that  he  had  heard  anything  more 
than  the  sound  of  his  voice.  ^  And  when 
I  heard  the  voice  of  his  words,  then  icas  I 
in  a  deep  sleep  on  my  face.     Comp.  Notes 


422 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  634 


10  T[  And  behold,  a  hand  touched 
me,  which  'set  me  upon  my  knees 
and  upoyi  the  pahns  of  my  hands. 

11  And  he  said  unto  me,  0  Dan- 
iel, a  man  ''greatly  beloved,  under- 
stand the  words  that  I  speak  unto 
thee,  and  stand  "  upright :  for  unto 
thee  am  I  now  sent.     And  when  he 


*^  moved. 


^  of  desires. 


had  spoken  this  word  unto  me,  1 
stood  trembling. 

12  Then  said  he  unto  me,  Fear 
not,  Daniel:  for  from  the  first  day 
that  thou  didst  set  thy  heart  to  un- 
derstand, and  to  chasten  thyself  be- 
fore thy  God,  thy  words  were  <> heard, 
and  1  am  come  for  thy  words. 

'  upon  thy  standing.  d  Ac.  19.  30,  31. 


on  cli.  viii.  IS.  Lengerke  renders  this, 
'I  8a»k  into  a  deep  sleep,'  &c.  This  is 
undoubtedly  the  meaning,  that  when  he 
heard  this  voice  he  was  overcome,  and 
sank  prostrate  and  senseless  upon  the 
earth.  The  sense  of  the  Hebrew  may  be 
thus  expressed:  'I  became — \i;'"in — op- 
pressed with  sleep,'  Ac. 

10.  And  behold,  a  hand  touched  me. 
The  hand  of  the  angel.  Comp.  ch.  viii. 
18.  ^  Which  set  me  vpon  my  knees,  and 
upon  the  palms  of  my  hands.  Not  'up- 
right,' as  in  ch.  viii.  18.  That  is,  he  had 
not  strength  given  him  at  once  to  stand 
erect,  but  he  was  partially  raised  up,  and 
enabled  to  move,  though  in  a  feeble  and 
tottering  manner.  The  word  here  used — 
JJ1J — means  to  move  to  and  fro;  to  waver; 
to  vacillate  ; — and  the  sense  here,  as  ex- 
pressed by  Gesenius  [Lex.)  is, '  lo,  a  hand 
touched  me,  and  caused  me  to  reel  (i.  e. 
to  stand  reeling  and  trembling,)  upon  my 
knees  and  hands.'  He  was  gradually  re- 
stored to  strength. 

11.  And  he  said  unto  me,  0  Daniel,  a 
man  greatly  beloved.  That  is,  in  heaven. 
Marg.,  as  in  Heb.,  of  desire.  See  Notes 
on  ch.  ix.  23.  ^  Understatid  the  words 
that  I  speak  unto  thee.  That  is,  attend 
to  them,  implying  that  he  would  be  able 
to  understand  them.  ^  And  stand  up- 
right. Marg.,  as  in  Heb.,  upon  thy  stand- 
in<j.  That  is,  stand  erect.  See  Notes  on 
ch.  viii.  18. 

12.  Then  said  he  unto  me.  Fear  not. 
Be  not  alarmed  at  my  presence  ;  do  not 
fear  that  your  devotions  are  not  accepted, 
and  that  your  prayers  are  not  heard. 
^  For  from  the  first  day  that  thou  didst 
iet  thy  heart  to  understand.  That  is,  by  a 
ieason  of  extraordinary  devotion.  Daniel 
had  devoted  three  full  weeks  to  such  a 
Berrice  (vs.  2,  3),  and  it  would  seem  from 
this  that  one  object  which  he  had  in 
view  was  to  make  inquiry  afbout  the  fu- 
'are  condition  of  his  people,  or  to  learn 


what  was  his  own  duty  in  the  present 
circumstances,  or  what  methods  he  might 
use  to  secure  the  return  of  his  country- 
men to  their  own  land.  The  circum- 
stances of  the  case  were  such  as  to  make 
either  of  these  inquiries  proper,  and  the 
angel  now  affirms  that  from  the  first  day 
when  he  entered  on  these  investigations, 
he  was  despatched  to  come  to  him,  and 
to  assure  him  that  his  prayer  was  heard. 
The  reason  why  he  had  not  sooner  ar- 
rived, and  why  Daniel  was  left  to  con- 
tinue his  prayers  so  long  without  any 
answer  being  returned,  is  stated  in  the 
following  verses.  Comp.  Notes  on  ch. 
ix.  23.  ^  And  to  chasten  thyself  before 
thy  God.  That  is,  by  fasting  and  humi- 
liation. Literally,  to  afflict  thyself.  %  Thy 
words  were  heard.  In  heaven.  Another 
proof  that  prayer  is  at  once  heard,  though 
the  answer  may  be  long  delayed.  The 
instance  before  us  shows  that  the  answer 
to  prayer  may  seem  to  be  delayed,  from 
c.iuses  unknown  to  us,  though  the  prayer 
ascends  at  once  to  heaven,  and  God  de- 
signs to  answer  it.  In  this  case,  it  was 
deferred  by  the  detention  of  the  messen- 
ger on  the  way  (ver.  13) ;  in  other  cases 
it  may  be  from  a  different  cause;  but  it 
should  never  be  set  down  as  a  proof  that 
prayer  is  not  heard,  and  that  it  will  not 
be  answered,  because  the  answer  is  not 
granted  at  once.  AVeeks,  or  months,  or 
years  may  elapse  before  the  divine  pur- 
pose shall  be  made  known,  though,  so  to 
spe.ak,  the  messenger  maj'  be  on  his  way 
to  us.  Something  may  prevent  the  an- 
swer being  borne  to  us;  some  'prince  of 
the  kingdom  of  Persia'  may  withstand 
the  messenger;  some  cause  which  we 
may  not  know  may  hinder  the  immediate 
answer  of  our  prayer  either  in  our  own 
hearts,  or  in  outward  events  which  can- 
not at  once  be  controlled  without  a  mira- 
cle, or  in  the  feelings  and  views  of  our 
friends  whom  we  seek  to  have  converted 
and  saved,  but  the  purpose  to  answer  the 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER   X, 


423 


13  But  the  prince  of  the  kingdom  I  twenty  days 
of  Persia  withstood  me   one    and ' 


but  lo,  Michael,  » one 

or,  the  fust.    Judc  9 ;  Ke.  12.  7. 


prayer  may  hnve  been  simultaneous  with 
its  being  offered,  and  a  train  of  measures 
way  have  been  commenced  at  once  to 
bring  about  the  result,  though  many  weeks 
or  months  of  delay,  of  anxiety,  of  tears, 
may  ebipso  before  we  nttain  the  object  we 
desired.  Daniel  would  have  been  cheered 
in  his  days  of  fasting  and  service  if  ho 
had  known  that  an  angel  was  on  his  way 
to  him  to  comfort  him,  and  to  communi- 
cate to  him  an  answer  from  God  j  often — 
why  not  always — in  our  days  of  deepest 
anxiety  and  trouble ;  ^yhen  our  prayers 
seem  not  to  penetrate  the  skies ;  when 
we  meet  with  no  response;  %vhen  the 
thing  for  which  we  pray  seems  to  be 
withheld;  when  our  friends  remain  un- 
converted; when  irreligion  abounds  and 
prevails;  when  we  seem  to  be  doing  no 
good,  and  when  calamity  presses  upon 
us,  if  we  saw  the  arrangement  which  God 
was  already  making  to  answer  the  prayer, 
and  could  see  the  messenger  on  the  way, 
our  hearts  would  exult,  and  our  tears 
would  cease  to  flow.  And  why,  in  our ; 
days  of  trouble  and  anxiety,  should  we 
not  believe  that  it  is  so,  and  that  God,  \ 
even  though  the  delay  may  seem  to  be  [ 
long,  will  j'et  show  himself  to  be  a  hearer 
and  an  answerer  of  prayer? 

13.  But  the  prince  of  the  kingdom  of 
Persia.  In  explaining  this  very  difficult 
verse,  it  maj-  be  proper  I.  to  consider  the 
literal  sense  of  the  words ;  II.  to  deduce 
the  fair  meaning  of  the  passage  as  thus 
explained  ;  and  III.  to  notice  the  practi- 
cal truths  taught.  The  word  rendered 
prince — 1L" — «(ir,  means  properly  a  leader, 
commander,  chief,  as  of  troops,  Gen.  xxi. 
22  ;  of  a  king's  body-guard.  Gen.  xxxvii. 
36  ;  of  cup-bearers.  Gen.  xlix.  9 ;  of  a 
prison,  Gen.  xxxix.  21,  22;  of  a  flock. 
Gen.  xlvii.  6.  Then  it  means  a  prince,  a 
noble,  a  chief  in  the  state,  Gen.  xii.  15. 
In  Dan.  viii.  25,  in  the  phrase  'Prince  of 
princes,'  it  refers  to  God.  So  far  as  the 
word  is  concerned  in  the  phrase  'prince 
of  the  kingdom  of  Persia,'  it  might  refer 
to  a  prince  ruling  over  that  kingdom,  or 
to  a  prime  minister  of  the  state,  but  the 
language  also  is  such  that  it  is  applicable 
to  an  angelic  being  supposed  to  preside 
ovor  a  staie,  or  to  influence  its  councils". 
If  this  idea  is  admitted ;  if  it  be  believed  j 
Uiat  angels  do  thus  preside  over  particu- 1 


lar  states,  this  language  would  properly 
express   that  fact.     Gesenius  {Lex.)  ex- 
plains it  in  this  passage  as  denoting  the 
'  chiefs,  princes  and  angels  ;  i.  e.  the  arch- 
angels .acting  as   patrons  and  advocates 
of  particular  nations   before  God.'     That 
this  is  the  proper  meaning  hero  as  de- 
duced from   the  words,  is  apparent,   for 
(a)  it  is  an  angel  th.at  is  speaking,  and  it 
would  seem  most  natural  to  suppose  that 
ho  had  encountered  one  of  his  own  rank; 
(h)  the  mention  of  Michael  who  came  to 
his   aid — .a  name  which,  as  we  shall  see, 
properly  denotes  an   angel,  leads  to  the 
same  conclusion  ;  (c)  it  accords,  also,  with 
the  prevailing  belief  on  iha  subject.    Un- 
doubtedly one  who   takes   into  view  all 
the  circumstances  referred  to  in  this  pas- 
,'  sage,  would  most  naturally  understand 
this  of  an   angelic    being,  having   some 
kind    of  jurisdiction   over  the  kingdom 
j  of  Persia.      "What  was  the  character  of 
this  'prince,'  however;   whether  he  was 
a  good  or  bad  angel,  is  not  intimated   by 
;  the  language.     It  is  only  implied  that  he 
had  a  chieftainship,  or  some   species  of 
guardian     care,    over    that    kingdom — 
watching  over  its  interests,  and  directing 
its  afl'airs.     As  he  offered  resistance,  how- 
ever, to  this  heavenly  messenger  on  hia 
way  to  Daniel,  and  as  it  was  necessary  to 
counteract  his  plans,  and  as  the  aid  of 
Michael   was    required    to  overcome  his 
opposition,  the  f.iir  construction   is,  that 
he   belonged  to  the  class  of  evil  angels. 
^  Withstood    me.       Heb.,     '  stood     over 
against  me.'     \\\\gate,restitit  mihi.    The 
fair  meaning  is,  that  he  resisted  or  op- 
posed him  ;  that  he  stood  over  against 
him,  and  delayed  him  on  his  way  to  Dan- 
iel.    In  what  manner  he  did  this  is  not 
stated.     The  most  obvious  interpretation 
is,  that,  in  order  to  answer  the  prayers 
of  Daniel  in  respect  to  his  people,  it  was 
necessary  that  some  arrangement  should 
be  made  in  reference  to  the  kingdom  of 
Persia — influencing   the   government   to 
be  favourable  to  the   restoration  of  the 
Jews    to   their   own   land ;    or  removing 
some  obstacles  to  such  return — obstacles 
which  had  given  Daniel  such  disquietude 
and  which  had  been  thrown  in  his  way 
by  the  presiding  angel  of  that  kingdom, 
\  One    and    twenty    days.       During    ibo 
Trholo  time  in  which  Daniel  was  engaged 


424 


DANIEL.  LB.  C.  534 

of  the  chief  princes,  came  to  help :  me ;  and  I  remained  there  with  the 

kings  of  Persia. 


in  fasting  and  prayer,  vs.  2,  3.     The  an- 
gel had  been  sent  forth  to  uiako  anange- 
inents  to  secure  the  answer  to  his  prayer 
when  he  began  to  pray,  but  had  been  de- 
layed during  all  that  time  by  the  opposi- 
tion which   he  had  Met  with   in  Persia. 
That  is,  it  required  all  that  time  to  over- 
come the  obstacles  existing  there  to  the 
accomplishment  of  these  purposes,  and  to 
make  these  arrangements  which  were  ne- 
cessary to  secure  the  result.     Meantime, 
Daniel  not  knowing  that  these  arrange- 
ments were  in  a  process  of  completion,  or 
that  an  angel  was  employed  to  secure  the 
answer  to  his  prayers,  yet  strong  in  faith, 
was  suffered  to  continue  his  supplications 
with  no  intimation  that  his  prayers  were 
heard,   or   that   he  would  be   answered. 
How  many  arrangements   may  there  be 
in  progress  designed  to  answer  our  pray- 
ers  of  which    we  know  nothing !     How 
many  agents  may  be  employed  to  bring 
about  an  answer!     What  mighty  obsta- 
cles may  be  in  a  process  of  removal,  and  i 
what   ciianges    may  be  made,  and  what 
influences  exerted,  while  we  are  suffered  i 
to  pray,  and  fast,  and  weep,  amidst  many  ! 
discouragements,  and  many  trials  of  our 
faith  and  patience  !     For  a  much  longer 
period  than  Daniel  was  engaged  in  his 
devotions,  may  we  be  required  often  now 
to  pray  before   the  arrangements  in  the 
course  of  Providence  shall  be  so  far  com- 
plete that  we  shall  receive  an  answer  to 
our   supplications,  for  the   things   to  be 
done  may  extend  far  into  future  months  or 
years.    ^  Bid  lo,  Jlichael,  one  of  the  chief 
princes.     Marg.,   the  first.     That  is,  the 
first  in  rank  of  the   'princes,'  or  the  an- 
gels.    In  other  words,  Michael  the  arch- 
angel. The  propermeaningof  this  name — 
^j<g,;; — is,  'AVho  as  God,'  and  is  a  name 
given,   undoubtedly,    from   some   resem- 
blance  to   God.     i'he  exact  reason  v-Iit/ 
it  is  given  is  not  anywhere  stated  ;  but 
may  it  not  be  this  : — that  one  looking  on 
the  majesty  and  glory  of  the  chief  of  the 
angels,    would   instinctively   ask,  '  Who, 
after  all,  is  like   God  ?     Even   this  lofty 
angel,  with  all   his  glory,  cannot  be  com- 
pared to  the  high  and  lofty  One.'     What- 
ever may  have  been  the  reason  of  the  ap- 
pellation, however,  the  name  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, has  a  definite  application,  and  is 
given  to  the   chief  one  of  the   angels. 


Comp.  Notes  on  Jude  9.     The  word  3Ii- 
chael,  as  a  proper  name,  occurs  several 
times   in  the   Scriptures,  Num.  siii.  13, 
1   Chron.  v.  13,    vi.  46,  vii.  3,  viii.   16, 
xii.  20,  xxvii.  18,   2  Chron.  xx\  2,   Ezra 
viii.  8.     It  is  used  as  applicable  ooan  an- 
gel, or  archangel,  in  the  following  places  : 
Dan.  X.  13,  2],  .xii.  1,  Jude  9,  Rev.  .\ii.  7. 
Little  more  is  known  of  him,  than  (o)  that 
he  occupies  the  rank  which  entitled  him 
to  be  called  an  archangel ;  and  (i)  that  he 
sustained,  in   the  time  of  Daniel  the  re- 
lation  of  patron  of  Israel    before    God, 
Deut.  X.  21.     That  an  nixjcl  is  referred  to 
here  is  manifest,  for  (1)  it  occurs  in  the  ac- 
count of  transactions  conducted  by  an  an- 
gel; (2)  the  use  of  the  word  elsewhere 
leads  to  this  supposition  ;  (3)  what  is  said 
to   have  been    done   is   the    appropriate 
work  of  an  angel.     This  is  apparent  be- 
cause Gabriel,  the  speaker,  says  that  what 
I  was  done  was  beyond  his  power  to  ac- 
complish.    He   was    eflfectually    resisted 
'  and   thwarted  by  the  counsels  of  Persia, 
until    one    of  higher  wisdom   and   rank 
j  than  himself  came  to  his  aid.     Ho  could, 
j  therefore,  have  been  no  less  than  an  an- 
;  gel,  and  was  clearly  a  being  of  a  higher 
rank    than    Gabriel    himself.      (4)    The 
phrase   'one  of  the  chief  princes,'  sus- 
tains this  interpretation.     It  implies  that 
he  was  one  of  those  who  held  an  exalted 
j  rank  among  those  who  are  called  'i)rinces,' 
1  and  if  this  word  in  this  connection  de- 
notes nngcis,  then  Michael  was  an  angel, 
and  one  of  the  most  exalted  of  the  an- 
gels.    This  accords  with  the  appellation 
given  to  him  by  Jude — '  the  archangel.' 
«f  Came  to  help  we.     He  does  not  state  in 
what  w.iy  this  was  done,  but  it  is  fairly 
implied   that  it  was    by   securing  better 
counsels  at  the  court  of  Persia — counsels 
more  favourable  to  the  Hebrews,  and  dif- 
ferent from  those  which  would  have  been 
carried  out  under  the  auspices  of  him  who 
is  called  '  the  prince  of  Persia.'     There  ij 
nothing  in  the  passage  to  forbid  the  sup- 
position that  it  was  by  so  influencing  the 
mind  of  the  king  and  his  ministers  as  to 
dispose  them  to  favour  the  return  of  the 
Jews,  or  to  afford  them  facilities  to  rebuild 
'  their  temple,  or  to  remove  some  of  the 
obstacles  which  would    tend   to   prevent 
their  restoration.    ^  And  1  remained  (here 
\  with  the  kiiigs  of  JPersia.     The  kivgi  of 


B.  C  534.] 


CHAPTER  X. 


425 


Persia  here,  in  tho  plural,  must  mean  the  I  prctation — its  real  meanfng— the  exact 
rulers.  There  was  properly  but  one  /n'lif;  j  truth  taught  in  it,  the  following  remarks 
of  that  nation,  though  the  name  may  have  '  may  be  made  :  (1)  There  was  early  a'pre- 
been  given  to  subordinate  rulers,  or  per-  I  vailing  opinion  that  special  angels  hatt 
baps  to  those  who  Iiad  been  kings  in  their  i  tho  charge  of  individuals,  as  their  iruar- 
OATH  country,  and  whose  countries  had  |  dians;  and  the  same  idea  existed  resnoct- 
been  subdued  by  the  Persian  arms,  and  ing  nations,  that  their  affairs  were  as- 
who  now  resided,  with  more  or  less  signed  to  particular  celestial  beings.  This 
authority,  at  the  Persian  court.  Tho  notion  among  tho  Hebrews  was  found  in 
phrase  'I  remained  there'  has  been  vari-  this  form — that  they  were  amjds,  or  crc- 
ously  translated.  Tho  Vulgate  renders  I  «/frZ  beings  of  e.xalted  rank  who  thus  pre- 
it  as  in  our  version.  The  Greek,  'And  I  sided  over  the  aifairs  of  men.  Amon" 
left  him  [to  wit,  Michael]  there  with  the  the  Greeks,  and  other  heathen  nations" 
prince  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia.'  The  I  the  form  which  it  took  was,  that  they  were 
Syriac,  'And  I  was  hindered  there  against  I //of/s  or  tutelary  divinities,  and  hence, 
the  prince  of  the  Persians.'  Luther,  |  each  people,  each  class,  each  family,  each 
'Then  obtained  I  the  victory  with  the  house,  had  its  own  God.  The  Hebrews 
kings  in  Persia.'  Lengerke,  'Then  ob- '  never  approximated  this  opinion  so  far  as 
tained  I  the  ascendency  (  Vurran;/)  among  to  suppose  that  these  beings  were  divine, 
the  kings  of  Persia.'  That  is,  as  he  ex-  or  that  they  occupied  the  place  of  the  su- 
plains  it,  'I  obtained  the  victory;  I  se- 1  preme  God — Jehovah — who  was  pecu- 
cured  this  result  that  my  counsel  in  be-  I  liarly  their  covenant  God  and  who  was 
half  of  the  Jewish  people  prevailed.'  p.  |  the  only  true  God.  They  did  admit  tho 
503.  The  same  explanation  is  given  supposition,  however,  that  there  min-ht 
by  Geyer,  Gesenius,  De  Wette,  Iliiver-  I  be  guardian  angels  of  their  own  nation, 
nick.  The  word — i.'n;  —  Ydthar,  prop-  and  the  same  idea  seems  to  have  prevailed 
crly  means  to  hang  out  and  over ;   to  be    among  them  in  regard  to  other  nations. 


redundant;  to  remain  or  bo  left;  to  be 
over  and  above,  to  excel,  &c.  Hence  the 
notion  in  Niphal,  of  excelling  others,  of 
getting  the  ascendency,   of    obtainin 


This  is  clearly  the  idea  in  the  passage 
before  us,  that,  while  Michael  was,  in  a 
peculiar  sense,  entrusted  with  the  affairs 
of  the  Hebrew  people,  there  were  intelli 


victory.  This  is  undoubtedly  tho  mean-  •^^"'^  invisible  beings  of  angelic  rank, 
in"-  here,  for  ho  was  not  left  with  the  i'*^"'' P'"''*^"^^*  "^'^r  other  nations,  and  who 
kings  of  Persia  ;  ho  did  not  remain  there.  I  influenced  their  counsels.  It  does  not 
The  true  idea  is,  that,  by  the  help  of  Mi- 1  aPpear  by  any  means  that  it  was  supposed 
chael,  who  came  to  his  aid,  he  was  enabled  i  tnatm  all  cases  these  were  ijood  beings,  for 
so  far  to  influence  the   Persian   counsels    '"^  counsels  of  the  nations  were  too  often 


against  the  purposes  of  him  who  is  called 
tho  'prince  of  Persia,' as  to  secure  the 
f:\vours  for  the  Hebrew  people  which 
Daniel   sought   by  prayer,   and    havin 


malignant  and  evil  to  admit  of  this  sup- 
position. In  the  case  before  us,  it  is  evi- 
dently supposed  that  the  influence  of  tho 
presiding  angel  of  Persia  was  adverse  to 


done  this,  he  came  at  once  to  him.  Tho  '  ^^^^  ^^"^^  '^''^  nght,  and  such  as  should 
only  delay  in  the  case  was  that  which  |  f®  counteracted  by  one  who  came  from 
was  caused  by  the  purposes  of  the  Persian  ]';^f"^f"-  C°™P-  ^^t'^s  on  Eph.  ii.  2. 
court,  and  by  the  difBeulty  of  securinn-   (2)  No  one  can  demonstrate  that  this  is 


such  arrangements  there  as  to  favour  the 
Hebrew  people,  and  to  facilitate  their  re 


not  so.     The   existence  of  wicked  angels 
is  no  more  incredible  in  itself  than  tho 


turn  to  their  own  country.     Having  done  '  existence  of  wicked  men,  and  that  they 

this,  he   came   at  once  to   Daniel  to  an-  '  should  influence  nations  and  rulers  is  in 

nounce    the  long  series  of  events  which  I  *'^^"  "^^  ™°'''^  improb.able  than   that  dis 

would  follow,   pertaining  to   his  people.  I  tmguished  statesmen  should.    There  may 

and  in  reference  to  which  his  mind  had  I  °,^'  m^eed,  no  foundation  for  the  opinion 

l-een    so    much  affected    during  his  pro- 1 '^r'^'iP'^'''"^"'''^'' '^"S*^^^ ''"'^  "*"><^'^ 'o  P''^'"- 

tracted  period  of  devotion.  ticular  individuals  or  nations  as  peculiar 

c     ,     •     ^,  1        i-         <•  ^i,     T.       ,\(juardimts,   but  it  may   be  true  notwith- 

Such  13  the  e.xplanation  of  the  literal  |  standing  that  some  one  of  these  fallen  spi- 

meaning  of  this  difficult  passage.     Now,  I  rits— for  if  there  are  any  such  beings  at  all, 

:n   reference    to  the    second   point   sug-   they  are  numerous— may  have  special  in- 

gested  as  necessary  to  its  proper  in ter- J  fluence  over  a  particular  indiviiual  or  na- 

36* 


426 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534, 


tion.     If  it  be  said  tbat  we  know  too  little 
about  this  to  enable  us  to  make  any  posi- 
tive statements  in  fovonr  of  this  opinion, 
it  should  also  be  said   that  we  know  loo 
little  to  enable  us  to  make  any  positive 
statements  aijninst  it;  and  for  aught  any 
one  can  prove,  it  mai/  be  so.     No  one  has 
a  right  to  assume  that  it  is  not  so ;  no  one 
can  demonstrate  thatitisnot  so.     It  may 
be  said  further,  that  things  look  as  ?/this 
were  so.     There  are  many  influences  on 
nations  and  individuals,  many  things  that 
occur   that  can  be  most  easily  accounted 
for  on  the  supposition  that  there  is  such  an 
agency  from  some  invisible  quarter.    If 
we  admit  the  reality  of  such  influence,  and 
such  interpositions,  the  things  which  occur 
are  more  easily  explained  than  if  we  deny 
it.      There    are    measures   taken ;   plans 
proposed;    influences    exerted;    schemes 
adapted — there  are  things  from  an   un- 
seen   quarter   to  give   prosperity',   or   to 
thwart  the   best  laid  plans,  that  cannot 
be  well  explained  without  the  supposition 
of  such  an   interference;    things   which 
perplex    all   philosophers   and  all  histo- 
rians   in    accounting    for    them  ;    things 
which  cannot  be  anticipated  or  explained 
on  any  known  principles  of  human  na- 
ture.    If  we  admit  the  reality  of  the  in- 
fluence of  invisible  beings,  as  in  the  case 
before  us,  the  solution  becomes  compara- 
tively easy;  at  least  wo  find  phenomena 
just  such  as  we  should  expect  on  such  a 
supposition.     (3)  It  may  he  added,  also, 
in  regard  to  the  particular  case  before  us, 
(a)  that  the  counsels  ai/aiust  the  Jews  to 
prevent  their  return  to  their  own  land, 
and  to  embarrass  them,  were  such  as  we 
should  anticipate  on  the  supposition  that 
an  evil  angel — an  enemy  of  God  and  his 
people — had  influenced  the   Persian  ru- 
lers ;  and  (i)  that   the    changes  wrought 
-in  those  counsels  in  favour  of  the  Jews, 
facilitating   their   return    to    their    own 
land,  were  such  as  we   should  expect  to 
find  on  the  supposition  that  those  coun- 
sels   and     plans    were     overruled     and 
changed  by  the  interposition  say  of  Ga- 
briel and  Michael.     And  similar  events 
often  happen.     There  are  such  changes 
in   the  counsels  of  nations,  and  in   the 
mind.s  of  rulers,  as  would  occur  on  the 
supposition  that  superior  beings  were  en- 
gaged in  thwarting  evil  plans,  and  influ- 
encing those  who  have  the  power  to  do 
right.     In  reference  to  the  Jews  in  their 
exile,  there  had  been  a  long  series  of  acts 
»f  opposition   and    oppression    pursued 


by  the  governments  of  the  East,  as  if 
under  the  direction  of  some  mnlignant 
spirit;  then  a  series  of  acts  in  their 
favour  followed,  as  if  the  change  had 
been  brought  about  by  the  interposition 
of  some  benignant  angel.  These  facts  ar« 
the  historical  basis  on  which  the  repre- 
sentation is  here  made. 

In  reference  to  the  third  point  sug- 
gested pertaining  to  this  passage — the 
practical  truths  taught  that  may  be  of 
use  to  us — it  may  be  remarked  that  the 
great  truth  is,  that  the  answer  to  prayer 
is  often  delayed,  not  by  any  indisposition 
on  the  part  of  God  to  answer  it,  and  not 
by  any  purpose  not  to  answer  it,  and  not 
by  the  mere  intention  of  trj-ing  our  faith, 
but  by  the  necesnary  arrangements  to  bring 
it  about.  It  is  of  such  a  nature  that  it 
cannot  be  answered  at  once.  It  requires 
time  io  make  important  changes;  to  in- 
fluence the  minds  of  men ;  to  remove 
obstacles  ;  to  raise  up  friends  ;  to  put  in 
operation  agencies  that  shall  secure  the 
thing  desired.  There  is  some  obstacle 
to  be  overcome.  There  is  some  plan  of 
evil  to  be  checked  and  staj-ed.  There 
is  some  agency  to  be  used  which  is  not 
now  in  existence,  and  which  is  to  be  cre- 
ated. The  opposition  of  the  '  prince  of 
Persia'  could  not  be  overcome  at  once, 
and  it  was  necessary  to  bring  in  the 
agency  of  a  higher  power — that  of  Mi- 
chael— to  effect  the  change.  This  could 
not  be  done  in  a  moment,  .a  day,  or  a 
week,  and  hence  the  long  delay  of  three 
'  full  weeks'  before  Daniel  had  an  assur- 
ance that  his  prayers  would  be  answered. 
So  it  often  happens  now.  We  pray  for 
the  conversion  of  a  child.  Yet  there 
may  be  obstacles  to  his  conversion,  un- 
seen by  us,  which  are  to  be  patiently  re- 
moved, and  perhaps  by  a  foreign  influ- 
ence, before  it  can  be  done.  Satan  may 
have  already  secured  a  control  over  his 
heart  which  is  to  be  broken  gradually, 
before  the  prayer  shall  be  answered.  We 
pray  for  the  removal  of  the  evils  of  in- 
temperance, of  slavery,  of  superstition, 
of  idolatry.  Yet  these  may  be  so  inter- 
locked with  the  customs  of  a  country, 
with  the  interests  of  men,  and  with  the 
laws,  that  they  cannot  be  at  once  eradi- 
cated except  by  miracle,  and  the  answer 
to  the  prayer  seems  to  be  long  delayed. 
We  pray  for  the  universal  spread  of  tho 
gospel  of  Christ.  Yet  bow  many  obsta- 
cles are  to  be  overcome,  and  how  many 
arrangements   made  before   this   prayer 


B.  0.  534.] 


CHAPTER   X. 


427 


14  Now  I  am  come  to  make  thee  i  16  And,  behold,  owe  like  the  simi- 
understand  what  shall  befall  thy  I  litude  of  the  sons  of  men  touched 
people  in  the  latter  ^days  :  for  ''yet  '^my  lips  :  then  I  opened  my  mouth, 
the  vision  is  for  manij  days.  \  and  spake,  and  said  unto  him  that 

15  And  when  he  had  spoken  such  stood  before  me,  O  my  Lord,  by 
words  unto  mc,  I  set  my  face  to-  the  vision  my  sorrows  are  turned 
ward   the    ground,    and   I   became  upon  me,  and  I   have  retained  no 

•^  strength 


dumb. 

'  Ge.  49. 1 ;  2  Ti.  3. 1 


be.  8.  26;  He.  2.  3. 


can  be  fully  answered ;  and  how  many 
tears  arc  to  be  sLed,  and  perils  encoun- 
tered, and  lives  sacrificed,  before  the 
prayer  of  the  church  shall  be  fully  an- 
swered, and  the  earth  shall  be  filled  with 
the  knowledge  of  the  Lord.  The  duti/, 
then,  which  is  taught,  is  that  of  patience, 
of  perseverance,  of  faith  in  God,  of  a 
firm  belief  that  he  is  true  to  all  his  pro- 
mises, and  that  he  is  a  hearer  of  prayer — 
though  the  blessing  seems  long  delayed. 

14.  I\ow  I  am  come  to  make  thee  niidcr- 
stnnd,  &c.  After  these  long  delays,  and 
after  the  arrangements  have  been  made 
necessary  to  bring  about  the  objects 
sought  by  your  prayers.  ^  In  the  latter 
dai/s.  In  future  times — extending  down 
to  the  last  period  of  the  world.  See 
Notes  on  Isa.  ii.  2.  %  For  yet  the  viniou 
is  /()(•  many  days.  E.xtends  far  into  fu- 
ture time.  It  is  probable  that  the  prayer 
of  Daniel  referred  more  particularly  to 
what  he  desired  should  soon  occur — the 
restoration  of  the  people  to  their  own 
land;  the  angel  informs  him  that  the 
disclosures  which  he  was  to  make  covered 
a  much  more  extended  period,  and  em- 
braced more  important  events.  So  it  is 
often.  The  answer  to  prayer  often  in- 
cludes much  more  than  we  asked  for, 
and  the  abundant  blessings  that  are  con- 
ferred, beyond  what  wo  supplicate,  are 
vastly  beyond  a  compensation  for  the 
delay. 

15.  And  ichen  he  had  spoJcen  stich 
wonle,  &o.  Daniel  was  naturally  over- 
come by  the  communication  which  hnd 
been  made  to  him.  The  manner  in 
which  the  prayer  was  answered  seems  to 
have  been  entirely  diflerent  from  what 
be  had  expected.  The  presence  of  a 
heavenly  Iteiug;  the  majesty  of  his  ap- 
pearance: the  assurant'c  that  he  gave 
that  he  had  come  to  answer  his  prayer, 
and  the  fact  that  ho  had  important  reve- 
lations to  make  respecting  the  future, 
orercame  him,  and  be  laid  bis  face  upoD 


c  Is.  6.  7,  S ;  Je.  1. 9. 


^  ver.  8. 


the  ground  in  silence.  Is  there  any  one 
of  us  who  would  not  be  awed  into  pro- 
found silence  if  a  heavenly  messenger 
should  stand  before  us  to  disclose  what 
was  to  occur  to  us,  to  our  families,  to 
our  friends,  to  our  country',  in  far  distant 
years  ? 

10.  And,  behold,  one  like  the  similitude 
of  the  sons  of  men  touched  my  lips.  In 
the  form  of  a  man.  The  reference  here 
is  undoubtedly  to  Gabriel,  appearing  to 
Daniel  in  human  form.  Why  he  does 
not  name  him  is  unknown  ;  nor  is  there 
any  intimation  whether  he  changed  his 
form  as  he  now  approached  the  prophet. 
It  would  seem  not  improbable  that,  see- 
ing the  effect  of  his  presence  and  his 
words  on  Daniel,  he  laid  aside  some  of 
the  manifestations  of  awe  and  majesty 
in  which  he  had  at  first  appeared  to  him, 
and  approached  him  as  a  man,  and  placed 
his  hands  on  his  lips — as  a  sign  that  he 
should  speak,  or  as  imparting  power  to 
him  to  speak.  See  Notes  on  Isa.  vi.  6,  7. 
*[  /  opened  my  month,  and  spake.  His 
fear  was  removed,  and  he  was  now  able  to 
address  the  heavenly  messenger.  ^  0 
my  Lord.  A  title  of  respectful  address, 
but  without  indicating  the  rank  of  him 
to  whom  it  is  applied.  ^\  By  the  vision 
my  sorrows  are  turned  upon  me.  The 
word  rendered  sorrows — an^X — means 
properly  icrithinrjs,  throes,  pains,  as  of  a 
woman  in  travail,  Isa.  xiii.  8;  xxi.  3; 
1  Sam.  iv.  13  ;  and  then  any  deep  pain 
or  anguish.  Here  it  refers  to  terror  or 
fri'jht,  as  so  great  as  to  prostrate  the 
strength  of  Daniel.  The  word  rendered 
are  turned — iDCnj — from  ^o^"'  means,  in 
Niphal,  to  turn  oneself  about,  to  turn 
back,  <tc.  The  same  phrase  which  is 
here  used  occurs  also  in  1  Sam.  iv.  19, 
'  her  pains  turned  upon  her;'  thatis,  came 
upon  her.  Perhaps  we  should  express 
the  idea  by  saying  that  they  rolled  upon 
us,  or  over  us — like  the  eurges  of  the 
ocean. 


428 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534. 


17  For  hovr  can  =  tlio  servant  of  I 
this  my  lord  talk  Avith  tiiis  my  lord  ? 
for  as  for  me,  strai;j;ht\vay  there  re-* 
inained  no  strcn^tli   in    me,  neither ! 
is  tliere  breatli  left  in  me. 

18  Then  there  came  again  and 
touched  me  one  like  the  appearance 
of  a  man,  and  he  strengthened  me. , 

19  And  said,  0  man  greatly  be-  j 

*  or,  tltis  senant  of. 

17.  Far  how  can  the  servant  of  this  my 
lord.  Acknowledging  his  humble  and 
lowly  condition  .nnd  r.ank  in  the  presence 
of  an  angel — a  messenger  now  sent  from 
heaven.  •[  Neither  is  there  breath  left  in 
me.  That  is,  he  was  utterly  overcome  and 
prostrate.  lie  felt  that  he  was  incapable 
of  speaking  in  the  presence  of  one  who 
had  tlescended  from  God. 

18.  Then  there  came  again  and  touched 
me,  &c.  The  same  one  is  here  referred 
to  doubtless  who  is  mentioned  in  ver.  16 
— the  angel.  Ho  came  to  him  again  in 
this  condescending  and  familiar  manner 
in  order  to  allay  his  fears,  and  to  prepare 
him  to  receive  his  communications  with 
entire  calmness. 

19.  And  said,  0  man  f/reatli/  beloved. 
See  Notes  on  ch.  ix.  23.  *^^  Fear  not. 
Neither  at  m.y  presence,  nor  at  what  I 
have  to  say.  There  was  nothing  in  the 
visitation  of  an  angel  that  could  be  a 
ground  of  dread  to  a  good  man  ;  there  was 
nothing  in  what  he  had  to  communicnte 
that  could  bo  a  reasonable  cause  of  alarm. 
5i  Be  strong,  yea,  be  strong.  These  are 
words  of  encouragement  such  as  we  ad- 
dress to  those  who  are  timid  and  fearful. 
We  e.\iiort  them  not  to  yield ;  to  make  a 
vigorous  effort  to  meet  danger,  difficult}', 
or  trial.  ^  Let  my  Lord  speal:  That  is.. 
I  am  now  prepared  to  receive  what  you 
have  to  communicate.  ^  For  thou  hast 
strengthened  me.  By  your  encouraging 
words,  and  by  the  kindness  of  your  man- 
ner. 

20.  Then  said  he  nnto  me,  Knonest  thou 
wherefore  I  come  nnto  thee  ?  This  was 
known  by  what  the  angel  had  said  in 
ver.  14.  He  sccnis  to  have  called  his  at-  ' 
tention  to  it,  and  to  have  proposed  the 
question,  because  Dnniel  had  been  so 
overcome  by  his  fright  that  it  might  be 
doubtful  whether  he  had  understood  him  . 
distinctly  when  he  had  told  him  the  ob-  j 
ject  of  his  coming.    He  therefore  pro- 1 


loved,  fear  not:  peace  he  tinto  thee, 
be  strong,  j^ea,  be  strong.  And 
■when  I)c  had  spoken  unto  me,  I  -was 
strengthened,  and  said.  Let  my  lord 
speak  ;  for  ''thou  hast  strengtliened 
me. 

20  Then    said  he,  Knowest  thou 
•wherefore  I  come  unto  thee?   and 
noAV  will  I  return  to  fight  ■with  the 
ti  2  Co.  12.  9. 

poses  the  question  here,  and  as  the  silence 
of  Daniel  seems  to  have  been  construed 
as  a  declaration  that  he  did  understand 
the  purpose  of  the  visit,  he  proceeds  to 
unfold  fully  the  purport  of  his  message. 
•][  And  now  will  J  return.  That  is,  evi- 
dentl}',  after  he  had  made  known  to  him 
the  message  which  he  came  to  deliver. 
He  cannot  mean  that  he  would  then  leave 
Daniel,  and  return  immediately  to  Per- 
sia, for  he  proceeds  at  length  (chs.  xi. 
xii.)  to  deliver  his  message  to  him,  and 
to  state  what  would  occur  in  the  world  in 
future  times.  ^  To  Jight  with  the  prince 
of  Persia.  In  ver.  13,  he  says  that  he 
had  had  a  contest  with  that  '  prince.'  and 
that  in  consequence  of  that  he  had  been 
delaj'cd  on  his  journey  to  Daniel.  By  the 
interposition  of  Michael,  the  afl'airs  of 
Persia  had  been  so  arranged,  that  the  op- 
position to  what  was  desiied  by  Daniel 
had  been  in  part  removed — so  far,  at 
least,  as  to  make  it  certain  thai  his  pray- 
ers would  be  answered.  See  Notes  on 
that  verse.  But  still  it  would  seem  that 
the  difficulty  was  not  entirely  overcome, 
and  that  it  would  be  desirable  for  him  to 
return,  and  to  complete  the  arrangements 
which  had  been  commenced.  There  were 
still  causes  in  existence  in  Persia  which 
might  tend  to  frustrate  all  these  plans 
unless  they  were  counteracted,  and  his 
presence  might  still  be  necessary  there  to 
secure  the  safe  return  of  the  exiles  to 
their  own  land,  and  the  means  required 
to  rebuild  the  city  and  temple.  The  sim- 
ple meaning  of  this  is,  that  it  would  be 
necessary  to  exert  a  farther  influence  at 
the  Persian  court  in  order  to  bring  about 
the  object  desired,  and  this  fact  is  ex- 
pressed in  language  derived  from  the  be- 
lief that  angelic  beings,  good  and  bad, 
have  much  to  do  in  cortroHing  the  minds 
of  men.  ^  And  when  J  am  gone  forth. 
Literally,  '  and  I  go  forth.'  The  mean- 
ing seems  to  be  that  he  would  return  tu 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER  X. 


429 


prince  "of  Persia:  and  when  I  am  I  is  noted   in  the  scripture  of  truth: 
gone  forth,  lo,  the  prince  of  Grecia  |  and  there  is  none  that  ^  holdoth  witli 

mo   in   these   things,    but   Michael 

"^your  prince. 

^  strcngthenethhimself.  "=  ver.  13. 


shall  come 
21  But  I  will  show  thee  that  which 


Persia,  and  would  so  direct  affivirs  there 
that  the  welfare  of  the  Jews  would  be 
proQioted,  and  that  protection  would  bo 
txtended  to  them.  Tbij,  he  says,  he 
would  continue  as  long  as  it  was  neces- 
sary, for  when  he  should  have  gone  forth, 
the  king  of  Greece  would  come,  and  the 
affairs  of  Persia  would  be  put  on  a  new 
fooling,  but  on  such  a  footing  as  not  to 
require  hh  presence — for  the  government 
would  be  of  itself  favourable  to  the  Jews. 
The  sense  is,  that  up  to  the  time  when 
this  '  king  of  Grecia'  should  come,  there 
would  be  a  state  of  things  in  the  Persian 
court  that  would  demand  the  presence 
of  some  being  from  heaven — exerting 
some  constant  influence  to  prevent  an 
outbreak  against  the  Jews,  and  to  secure 
their  peace  and  prosperity,  but  that  when 
the  '  king  of  Grecia'  should  come  he  would 
himself  favour  their  cause,  and  render  the 
presence  of  the  angel  unnecessary.  No 
one  can  prove  that  this  is  not  a  correct 
representation,  or  that  the  favour  shown 
to  the  Jews  at  the  Persian  court  during 
all  the  time  of  the  rebuilding  of  the  city 
.ind  the  temple,  was  not  to  be  traced  to 
some  presiding  influence  from  above,  or 
that  that  was  not  put  forth  in  connection 
with  the  ministration  of  an  angelic  being. 
Indeed,  it  is  in  accordance  with  all  the 
teachings  of  the  Bible  that  the  disposi- 
tion of  kings  and  princes  to  show  favour  I 
to  the  people  of  God,  like  all  else  that  is 
good  in  this  world,  is  to  be  traced  to  an 
influence  from  above  ;  and  it  is  not  con-  | 
trary  to  any  of  the  laws  of  analogy,  or  ■ 
any  thing  with  which  we  arc  acquainted 
pertaining  to  the  spiritual  world,  to  sup- 
pose that  angelic  interposition  may  be 
employed  in  any  case  in  bringing  about 
that  which  is  good.  ^  Zo,  the  jiriuce  of 
Grecia  shall  come.  lieb.,  Javan — ]v  ■ 
There  can  be  no  dount  that  Greece  is  in- 
tended. The  word  properly  denotes 
Ionia  (derived  from  this  word),  '  the  name  ' 
of  which  province,'  says  Gesenius,  'as  be-  i 
ingadjacent  to  the  East,and  betterknown, 
was  extended  so  as  to  comprehend  the 
whole  of  Greece,  as  is  expressly  said  by  , 
Greek  writers  themselves.'  Lex.     By  the  | 


•  prince  of  Greece'  here,  there  can  he  no 
[  doubt  that  there  is  reference  to  Alexan- 
der the  Great,  who  conquered  Persia. 
See  ch.  xi.  1—4.  The  meaning  here  is, 
that  when  he  should  come,  and  conquer 
Persia,  the  opposition  which  the  Hebrews 
had  encountered  from  that  country  would 
cease,  and  there  would  then  be  no  need  of 
the  interposition  of  the  angel  at  the  Persian 
court.  The  matter  of  fact  was,  that  tho 
Hebrews  were  favoured  by  Alexander  the 
Great,  and  that  whatever  there  was  in  the 
Persian  or  Chaldean  power  which  they 
had  had  reason  to  dread,  was  then  brought 
to  an  end,  fur  all  those  Eastern  govern 
ments  were  absorbed  in  the  empire  of 
Alexander — the  Macedonian  monarchy. 
21.  But  I  will  show  thee  that  which'ii 
noted  ill  the  scripture  of  truth.  The  word 
noted  hero  means  irrittcti,  or  recorded. 
The  scripture  of  truth  means  the  trxie 
writing,  and  the  reference  is  doubtless  to 
the  divine  purposes  or  decrees  in  this 
matter — for  {«)  there  is  no  other  writing 
where  these  things  were  then  found ;  (i)  the 
angel  came  to  make  known  what  could  bo 
known  in  no  other  way,  and  therefore 
what  was  not  yet  found  in  any  book  to 
which  man  had  access;  (e)  this  language 
accords  with  common  representations  in 
the  Scriptures  respecting  future  events. 
They  are  described  as  written  down  in  a 
book  that  is  in  the  hands  of  God,  in  which 
are  recorded  all  future  events — the  names 
of  those  that  shall  be  saved — and  all  the 
deeds  of  men.  Comp.  Deut.  xxxii.  34; 
Mai.  iii.  IG;  Ps.  cxxxix.  IG;  Rev.  v.  1. 
The  representation  is  figurative,  of  course, 
and  the  meaning  is,  that,  in  the  view  of 
the  divine  mind,  all  future  events  are  as 
certain  as  if  they  were  actually  recorded 
as  history,  or  as  if  they  were  now  all 
written  down.  The  angel  came  that  he 
might  unfold  a  portion  of  that  volume, 
and  iisclose  the  contents  of  its  secret 
pages  ;  that  is,  describe  an  important 
series  of  events  of  great  interest  to  the 
Jewish  people  and  to  the  world  at  large. 
^  Aud  there  is  none  that  holdeth  with  me  in 
these  things,  ^lar^.,  utrengtheneth  himself. 
So  the  Hebrew.  Tho  idea  is,  that  thera 
was  none  that  rendered  aid  in  this  matter, 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534 


or  that  stood  by  him,  and  would  accomplish 
the  designs  which  he  was  meditating  in 
their  behalf  pertaining  to  Persia.  The 
angel  saw  that  there  were  powerful  in- 
fluences against  the  interests  of  the  lie- 
brew  people  at  work  in  the  courtof  Persia; 
that  it  was  necessary  that  they  should  be 
counteracted;  that  unless  this  were  done, 
fearful  calamities  would  come  upon  the 
Jewish  people,  and  they  would  be  sub- 
jected to  great  embarrassments  in  their 
effort  to  rebuild  their  city  and  temple,  and 
he  says  that  there  was  no  one  whose  aid 
could  be  permanently  and  certainly  relied 
on  but  that  of  Michael.  He  himself  was 
to  return  to  the  court  of  Persia  to  en- 
deavour to  counteract  the  influence  of  the 
'prince  of  Persia,'  but,  as  in  the  former 
case  when  on  his  way  to  Daniel  (ver  13,) 
he  would  not  have  been  able  to  counter- 
act the  machinations  of  that  prince  if  it 
had  not  been  for  the  interposition  of  Mi- 
chael, so  he  felt  now  that  reliance  was  still 
to  be  placed  on  his  assistance  in  the  mat- 
ter. ^  But  3Iichael  your  prince.  See 
Notes  on  ver.  13.  The  patron,  or  guar- 
dian of  your  people,  and  of  their  inter- 
ests. The  idea  intended  to  be  conveyed 
here  undoubtedly  is,  that  Michael  was  a 
guardian  angel  for  the  Jewish  people; 
that  ho  had  special  charge  of  their  afi"airs  ; 
that  his  interposition  might  be  depended 
on  in  the  time  of  trouble  and  danger,  and 
that,  under  him,  their  interests  would  be 
safe.  No  one  can  prove  that  this  is  not 
so ;  and  as  on  earth  some  of  the  most  im- 
portant favours  that  we  enjoy  are  con- 
ferred by  the  instrumentality  of  others; 
as  we  are  often  defended  when  in  danger 
by  them;  as  we  are  counselled  and  di- 


rected by  them;  as  God  raises  up  for  tho 
orphan,  and  the  widow,  and  the  insane, 
and  the  sorrowful,  and  the  feeble,  those 
of  wealth  and  power  and  learning  who 
can  better  guard  their  interests  than  ibey 
could  themselves,  and  as  these  relations 
are  often  sustained,  and  these  favours 
conferred  by  those  who  are  invisible  to 
the  recipients,  so  it  gives,  in  a  higher 
sense,  a  new  beauty  to  the  arrangements 
of  the  universe  to  suppose  that  this  be- 
nevolent ofiice  is  often  undertaken  and 
discharged  by  angelic  beings.  Thus 
they  may  defend  us  from  danger;  ward 
otf  the  designs  of  our  enemies;  de- 
feat their  niachinations,  and  save  us  from 
numberless  evils  that  would  otherwise 
come  upon  us.  This  view  receives  addi- 
tional confirmation  if  it  be  admitted  that 
there  are  evil  angels,  and  that  they  seek 
the  ruin  of  mankind.  They  are  malig- 
nant; they  tempt  the  race  of  man; 
they  have  power  far  superior  to  our  own ; 
they  can  set  in  operation  a  train  of  evil 
influences  which  we  can  neither  foresee 
nor  counteract;  and  they  can  excite  the 
minds  of  wicked  men  to  do  us  injury  in  a 
way  which  we  cannot  anticipate,  and 
•against  which  we  cannot  defend  ourselves. 
In  these  circumstances,  any  one  can  per- 
ceive that  there  is  coneinnity  and  pro- 
priety in  the  supposition  that  there  are 
good  beings  of  a  higher  order  who  feel  an 
interest  in  the  welfare  of  man,  and  who 
come  to  us,  on  their  benevolent  errand,  to 
defend  us  from  danger,  and  to  aid  us  in 
our  efibrts  to  escape  from  the  perils  of  our 
fallen  condition,  and  to  reach  tho  king- 
dom of  heaven. 


CHAPTER  XI. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  CHAPTER. 


Tnis  chapter  contains  a  portion  of  those  things  which  the  angel  said  were  written  in  'the 
Scripture  of  truth,'  and  which  he  came  to  disclose  to  Daniel.  The  revelation  also  embraces  the 
twelfth  chapter,  and  tbe  two  comprise  the  last  recorded  communication  that  was  made  to 
Daniel.  The  revelation  which  is  made  in  these  chapters  not  only  embraces  a  large  portion  of 
history  of  interest  to  the  Jewish  people  of  ancient  times,  and  designed  to  give  instruction  as  to 
the  important  events  that  would  pertain  to  their  nation,  but  also,  in  its  progress,  alludes  to  im- 
portant pcrtotis  in  the  future  as  marking  decisive  eras  in  the  world's  history,  and  contains  hints 
lis  to  what  would  occur  down  to  the  end  of  all  things. 

The  chapter  before  us  embraces  the  following  definitely  marked  periods  : 
I.  The  succession  of  kings  in  Persia  to  the  time  of  a  mighty  king  who  should  arouse  all  th» 
•trength  of  his  kingdom  to  make  war  on  Greece — referring  doubtless  to  Xerxes,  vs.  1,  2.    Of 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER    XI. 


431 


those  kings  in  Persia  there  would  be  three — three  so  prominent  as  to  deserye  notice  in  the  rapid 
glance  at  future  events — Cambyses,  Smerdis,  and  Darius  Hystaspes. 

II.  After  this  succession  of  kinsjcS,  one  would  stand  up  or  appear  who  would  be  characterized 
RS  ruling  'with  great  dominion,'  and  'according  to  his  will,'  ver.  3.  The  dominion  evidently 
would  pass  into  his  hand,  and  he  would  be  distinguished  from  all  that  went  before  him.  There 
can  be  no  doubt,  from  the  connection,  and  from  what  is  said  in  ver.  4,  that  the  .•eference  here 
is  to  Alexander  the  Great. 

III.  The  state  of  the  empire  after  the  death  of  this  mighty  king,  ver.  4.  Ilis  kingdom  would 
be  broken,  and  would  be  divided  into  lour  parts — referring  doubtless  to  the  division  of  the  em- 
pire of  Alexander  after  his  death. 

IV.  The  history  then  proceeds  to  notice  the  events  that  would  pertain  to  two  of  these  portions 
of  the  empire — the  conflicts  between  the  king  of  the  South,  and  the  king  of  the  North — or  be- 
tween Kgypt  and  Syria,  vs.  5 — 19.  This  portion  of  the  history  embraces,  in  detail,  an  account 
of  the  policy,  the  negotiations,  and  the  wars  of  Antiochus  the  Great,  till  the  time  of  his  death. 
These  kiugdoms  are  particularly  referred  to,  probably  because  their  conflicts  would  effect  the 
holy  land,  and  pertained  ultimately  to  the  history  of  religion,  and  its  establishment  and  triumph 
in  the  world.  In  the  notice  of  these  two  sovereignties,  there  is  considerable  detail — so  much  so 
that  the  principal  events  could  have  been  readily  anticipated  by  those  who  were  in  possession 
of  the  writings  of  Daniel.  The  destiny  of  the  other  two  portions  of  the  empire  of  Alexander 
did  not  particularly  affect  the  history  of  religion,  or  pertain  to  the  holy  land,  and,  therefore, 
they  are  not  introduced.  In  a  p.irticular  manner,  the  history  of  Antiochus  the  Great  is  traced 
witli  great  minuteness  in  this  portion  of  the  prophecy,  because  his  doings  had  a  special  bearing 
on  the  Jewish  nation,  and  were  connected  with  the  progress  of  religion.  The  commentary  on 
this  portion  of  the  chapter  will  show  that  the  leading  events  are  traced  as  accurately  as  would 
be  a  summary  of  the  history  made  out  after  the  transactions  had  occurred. 

V.  A  brief  reference  of  the  successor  of  Antiochus  the  Great,  Seleucus  IV.  ver.  20.  As  he 
occupied  the  throne,  however,  but  for  a  short  period,  and  as  his  doings  did  not  partie\ilarly  effect 
the  condition  of  the  Hebrew  people,  or  the  interests  of  religion,  and  his  reign  was,  in  every 
respect,  unimportant,  it  is  passed  over  with  only  a  slight  notice. 

VI.  The  life  and  acts  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  vs.  21 — 15.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this 
portion  of  the  chapter  refers  to  Antiochus,  and  it  contains  a  full  detail  of  his  character  and  of 
his  doings.  The  account  here,  though  without  naming  him,  is  just  such  as  would  have  been 
given  by  one  who  should  have  written  after  the  events  had  occurred,  and  there  is  no  more  diffi- 
culty in  applying  the  description  in  this  chapter  to  him  now  than  there  would  have  been  in 
such  an  historical  narrative.  The  revelation  is  made,  evidently,  to  prepare  the  Jewish  people 
for  these  fearful  events,  and  these  heavy  trials,  in  their  history;  and  also  to  assure  them  tliat 
more  glorious  results  would  follow,  and  that  deliverance  would  succeed  these  calamities.  In 
the  troubles  which  Antiochus  would  bring  upon  the  Hebrew  people,  it  was  important  that  they 
should  have  before  them  a  record  containing  the  great  outlines  of  what  would  occur,  and  the 
assurance  of  ultimate  triumph — just  as  it  is  important  for  us  now  in  the  trials  which  we  have 
reason  to  anticipate  in  this  life,  to  have  before  us  iu  the  Bible  the  permanent  record  that  we 
shall  yet  find  deliverance.  In  the  twelfth  chapter,  therefore,  the  angel  directs  the  mind  on- 
ward to  brighter  times,  and  assures  Daniel  that  there  would  be  a  day  of  rejoicing. 


1  Also  I  in  the  first  =  year  of  Da- 


1.  Also  I.  I  the  angel.  lie  alludes 
here  to  what  he  had  done  on  a  former  oc- 
casion to  promote  the  interests  of  the 
Hebrev?  people,  and  to  secure  those  ar- 
rangements which  were  necessary  foi 
their  welfare — particularly  in  the  favour- 
able disposition  of  Darius  the  Mede  to- 
wards them.  %  In  the  first  year  of  Darius 
the  Mede.  See  Notes  on  eh.  v.  35.  He 
does  not  hero  state  the  things  contem- 
plated or  done  by  Darius  in  which  he  had 
confirmed  or  strengthened  him,  but  there 
can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  it  was  the 
purpose  which  he  had  conceived  to  re- 
store the  Jews  to  their  own  land,  and  to 
give  them  permission  to  rebuild  their  city 
and  temple.  Comp.  ch.  ix.  1.  It  was  in 
that  year  that  Daniel  offered  his  solemn 
prayer,  as  recorded  in  ch.  ix.;   in  that 


rius  the  Mede,  even  I,  stood  to  con- 
firm and  to  strengthen  him. 


year  that,  according  to  the  time  predicted 
by  Jeremiah  (see  Dan.  ix.  2),  the  cap- 
tivity would  terminate  ;  and  in  that  year 
that  an  influence  from  above  led  the  mind 
of  the  Persian  king  to  contemplate  the 
restoration  of  the  captive  people.  Cyrus 
was,  indeed,  the  one  through  whom  the 
edict  for  their  return  was  promulgated, 
but  as  he  reigned  under  his  uncle  Cyax- 
ares  or  Darius,  and  as  Cyaxares  was  the 
source  of  authority,  it  is  evident  that  hi$ 
mind  must  have  been  influenced  to  grant 
this  favour,  and  it  is  to  this  that  the  an- 
gel here  refers.  ^\  I  stood  to  confirm  and 
strengthen  him.  Comp.  Notes  on  ch.  x. 
13.  It  would  ,ieem  that  the  mind  of  Da- 
rius was  not  wholly  decided  ;  that  thera 
were  adverse  influences  bearing  on  it; 
that  there  were  probably  counsellors  of  hi* 


4a2  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  534. 

2  And  now  will  I  show  » thee  the '  yet  three  kings  in  Persia ;  and  tho 
truth.     Behold,  there  shall  stand  up  ^'Am.s.  7. 


realm  who  advised  against  the  proposed 
measures,  and  the  angel  here  says  that 
/ic  stood  by  him,  and  confirmed  him  in  his 
purpose,  and  secured  the  execution  of  his 
benevolent  plan.  AVho  can  prove  that  an 
angel  may  not  exert  an  influence  on  the 
heart  of  kings?  And  what  class  of  men 
is  there  who,  when  they  intend  to  do  good 
and  right,  are  more  likely  to  have  their 
purposes  changed  by  evil  counsellors  than 
kings;  and  who  is  there  that  more  needs 
a  heavenly  influence  to  confirm  their  de- 
sign to  do  right? 

2.  And  now  in'U  I  nhow  thee  the  truth. 
That  is,  the  truth  about  events  that  are 
to  occur  in  the  future,  and  which  will  ac- 
cord with  what  is  written  in  '  the  Scrip- 
tures of  truth,'  ch.  X.  21.  ^  Behold,  there 
sh(d!.  stand  tip  yet  three  Icings  in  Persia. 
The  phrase  stand  up  means  that  there 
would  be  so  many  kings  in  Persia;  that 
is,  there  would  be  three  he/ore  the  fourth 
which  he  mentions.  The  same  Hebrew 
word  here  rendered  stand  vp — l!;j? — oc- 
curs in  vs.  3,  4,  C,  7,  8,  14,  15, 16,  (twice), 
17,  20,  21,  25,  31 ;  also  ch.  xii.  1,  13.  In 
verse  8  it  is  rendered  continue;  in  verse 
16,  withstand ;  in  the  other  cases  stand 
i(p,  or  simply  stand.  Gesenius  sa3's  it  is 
a  word  used  particularly  of  a  new  prince, 
as  in  Dan.  viii.  23,  xi.  2,  3,  20.  He  does 
not  say  that  there  would  be  none  after- 
wards, but  he  evidently  designs  to  touch 
on  tho  great  and  leading  events  respect- 
ing the  Persian  empire,  so  far  as  they 
would  effect  the  Hebrew  people,  and  so 
far  as  they  would  constitute  prominent 
points  in  the  history  of  the  world.  He 
does  not,  therefore,  go  into  all  the  details 
respecting  the  history,  nor  does  he  men- 
tion all  tiie  kings  that  would  reign.  The 
prominent — the  material  points — would 
be  the  reign  of  those  three  kings;  then 
the  reign  of  the  fourth,  or  Xerxes,  as  his 
mad  expedition  to  Greece  would  lay  the 
real  foundation  for  the  invasion  of  Per- 
sia by  Alexander,  and  the  overthrow  of 
the  Persian  empire;  then  the  life  and 
conquests  of  Alexander,  and  then  the 
wars  consequent  on  the  division  of  his 
empire,  at  his  death.  Tho  'three  kings' 
here  referred  to,  were  Cambyses,  Pmer- 
dis,  and  Darius  Hystaspes.  As  this  com- 
munication was  made  in  the  third  year 
of  Cyrus  (ch.  x.  1,)  these  would  be  the 


next  in  order,  and  by  the  fourth  is  un- 
doubtedly meant  Xerxes.  There  were 
several  kings  of  Persia  after  Xerxes,  as 
Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  Darius  Nothus, 
Artaxerxes  Mnemon,  Ochus,  and  Darius 
Codomanus,  but  these  are  not  enume- 
rated because  the  real  ground  of  the  in- 
vasion of  Alexander,  the  thing  which 
connected  him  with  the  afl'airs  of  Persia, 
did  not  occur  in  their  reign,  but  it  was  the 
invasion  of  Greece  by  Xerxes.  ^  And 
the  fourth  shall  be  far  richer  than  they  all. 
That  is  Xerxes — for  he  was  the  fourth  in 
order,  and  the  description  here  agrees 
entirely  with  him.  He  would  of  course 
inherit  the  wealth  accumulated  by  these 
kings,  and  it  is  here  implied  that  he 
would  increase  that  wealth,  or  that,  in 
some  way,  he  would  possess  more  than 
they  all  combined.  The  wealth  of  this 
king  is  here  mentioned  probably  because 
the  magnificence  and  glory  of  an  Oriental 
monarch  was  estimated  in  a  considerable 
degree  by  his  possessions,  and  because 
his  riches  enabled  him  to  accomplish  his 
expedition  into  Greece.  Some  idea  of 
the  treasures  of  Xerxes  may  be  obtained 
by  considering  (a)  that  Cyrus  had  col- 
lected a  vast  amount  of  wealth  by  the 
conquest  of  Lj'dia,  and  the  subjugation 
of  Croesus  its  rich  king,  by  the  conquest 
of  Asia  Minor,  of  Armenia  and  of  Babylon 
— for  it  is  said  respecting  him,  "  I  will 
give  thee  the  treasures  of  darkness,  and 
hidden  riches  of  secret  places"  (Isa.  xlv. 
3.  Sec  Notes  on  that  passage),  (b)  That 
Cambyses  increased  that  wealth  which  he 
inherited  from  C3'rus  by  his  victories,  and 
by  his  plundering  the  temples  wherever 
he  came.  A  single  case  occurring  in  his 
conquests  may  illustrate  the  amount  of 
wealth  which  was  accumulated.  On  his 
return  from  Thebes,  in  Egypt,  he  caused 
all  the  temples  in  that  city  to  be  pillaged 
and  burnt  to  the  ground.  But  he  saved 
from  the  flames  gold  to  the  amount  of 
three  hundred  talents,  and  silver  to  the 
amount  of  two  thousand  and  five  hundred 
talents.  He  is  also  said  to  have  carried 
away  the  famous  circle  of  gold  that  en- 
compassed the  tomb  of  king  Ozymandias, 
being  three  hundred  and  sixty-five  cubits 
in  circumference,  on  which  were  repre- 
sented all  the  motions  of  the  several  con- 
stellations.    Universal  History,  ir.   140. 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER    XI, 


433 


fourth  shall  be  far  richer  than  tliey 
all :  and  by  his  strength  through  his 


(c)  This  was  further  increased  by  the  con- 
quests of  Darius  Ilystaspes,  and  by  his 
aoavy  taxes  on  the  people.  So  burden- 
some were  these  taxes,  that  he  was  called 
by  the  Persians,  o  KcnrrjKoi — the  'mer- 
chant,' or,  '  hoarder.'  One  of  the  first  acts 
of  Darius  was  to  divide  his  kingdom  into 
provinces  for  the  purpose  of  raising  trib- 
ute. "During  the  reign  of  Cjtus,  and 
indeed  of  Cambyses,  there  were  no  spe- 
cific tributes ;  but  presents  were  made  to 
the  sovereign.  On  account  of  these  and 
similar  innovations,  the  Persians  call  Da- 
rius a  merchant,  Cambj-ses  a  despot,  but 
CjTus  a  parent."  Herodotus,  B.  III. 
Ixxxi.x.  A  full  account  of  the  taxation 
of  the  kingdom  and  the  amount  of  the 
revenue  under  Darius,  may  be  seen  in 
Herodotus,  B.  III.  xc — xcvi.  The  sum  of 
the  tribute  under  Darius,  according  to 
Herodotus,  was  fourteen  thousand  five 
hundred  and  sixty  talents.  Besides  this 
sum  received  from  regular  taxation,  He- 
rodotus enumerates  a  great  amount  of  gold 
and  silver  and  other  valuable  things 
which  Darius  was  accustomed  to  receive 
annually  from  the  Ethiopians,  from  the 
people  of  Colchos,  from  the  Arabians,  and 
from  India.  All  this  vast  wealth  was 
inherited  by  Xerxes,  the  son  and  succes- 
sor of  Darius,  and  the  'fourth  king'  here 
referred  to.  Xerxes  was  full  four  j-ears 
in  making  provision  for  his  celebrated 
expedition  into  Greece.  Of  the  amount 
of  his  forces,  and  his  preparation,  a  full 
account  maj'  be  seen  in  Herodotus,  B.  VII. 
Of  his  icealth  Justin  makes  this  remark: 
Si  rer/em  species,  divitias,  non  ducem 
laudes :  qiiariim  tanta  copra  in  regno  ejus 
fnit,  ut  cum  Jhimina  multitudine  consume- 
rentui;  opes  tamen  reijicB  supieressent.  Hist, 
ii.  10.  Comp.  Diod.  Sic.  x.  e.  3;  Pliny 
His.  Nat.  xxiii.  10  ;  ^1.  xiii.  3  ;  Herod, 
iii.  96,  vii.  27—29.  In  the  city  of  Celcenre, 
Herodotus  says,  there  lived  a  man  named 
Pythius,  son  of  Atys,  a  native  of  Lydia, 
who  entertained  Xerxes  and  all  his  army 
with  great  magnificence,  and  who  farther 
engaged  to  supply  the  king  with  money 
for  the  war.  Xerxes  on  this  was  induced 
to  inquire  of  his  Persian  attendants  who  j 
this  Pythius  was,  and  what  were  the  re- 
sources which  enabled  him  to  make  these 
ofiers.  "Ii  IS  the  same,"  they  replied,  | 
"  who  presented  your  father  Darius  with  I 
37 


riches  he  shall  stir  up  all  against  the 
realm  of  Gi-ecia. 

3  And  a  mighty  king  shall  stand 

a  plane  tree  and  a  vine  of  gold,  and  who, 
next  to  yourself,  is  the  richest  of  man- 
kind." Herod,  vii.  27.  f  And  hij  his 
streihjth  through  his  riches  he  shall  stir  tip 
all  against  the  realm  of  Grecia.  That  is, 
all  his  kingdom.  He  was  enabled  to  do 
this  by  his  great  wealth  : — collecting  and 
equipping,  probably,  the  largest  army  that 
was  ever  assembled.  The  expedition  of 
Xerxes  against  Greece,  is  too  well  known 
to  need  to  be  detailed  here,  and  no  one 
can  fail  to  see  the  applicability  of  this  de- 
scription to  that  invasion.  Four  years 
was  spent  in  preparing  for  this  expedition, 
and  the  forces  that  constituted  the  army 
were  gathered  out  of  all  parts  of  the  vast 
empire  of  Xerxes,  embracing,  as  was  then 
supposed,  all  the  habitable  world  except 
Greece.  According  to  Justin,  the  army 
was  composed  of  seven  hundred  thousand 
of  his  own,  and  three  hundred  thousand 
auxiliaries.  Diodorus  Siculus  makes  it  to 
be  about  three  hundred  thousand  men ; 
Prideaux,  from  Herodotus  and  others, 
computes  it  to  have  amounted,  putting 
all  his  forces  by  sea  and  land  together,  tc 
two  millions  six  hundred  and  forty-one 
thousand  six  hundred  and  ten  men  ;  and 
he  adds  that  the  servants,  eunuchs,  sut- 
tlers,  and  such  persons  that  followed  tha 
camp,  made  as  many  more,  so  that  th« 
whole  number  that  followed  Xerxes  could 
not  have  been  less  than  five  millions. 
Connexion,  P.  1.  B.  iv.  vol.  i.  p.  410. 
Grotius  reclions  his  forces  at  five  millions 
two  hundred  and  eighty-two  thousand. 
These  immense  numbers  justify  the  ex- 
pression here,  and  show  with  what  pro- 
priety it  is  applied  to  the  hosts  of  Xerxes. 
On  the  supposition  that  this  was  written 
after  the  event,  and  that  it  was  history, 
instead  of  ^jro^/zcciy,  this  would  be  the 
very  language  which  would  be  employed. 
3.  And  a  mighty  king  shall  stand  vp. 
So  far  as  the  language  here  is  concerned, 
it  is  not  said  whether  this  would  be  in 
Persia,  as  a  successor  of  the  '  fourth  king' 
(ver.  2),  or  whether  it  would  be  at  some 
other  part  of  the  world.  The  next  verse, 
however,  shows  that  the  reference  is  to 
Alexander  the  Great — for  to  no  other  one 
is  it  applicable.  There  were  several 
monarchs  of  Persia,  indeed,  that  suc- 
ceeded Xerxes,  before  the  kingdom  was 
invaded  and  subdued  by  Alexander  (see 


434 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534. 


uj),  that  shall  rule  with  great  do- 1  his  kingdom  »  shall  be  broken,  and 
minion,  and    do   according   to   his  shall   be    divided   toward  the  four 


will. 

4  And  when  he  shall  stand  up, 

Notes  on  ver.  2),  and  these  are  here 
entirely  passed  over  without  being  alluded 
to.  It  must  be  admitted  that  one  who 
should  have  read  this  prophecy  before 
the  events  had  occurred,  would  have  in- 
ferred naturally  that  this  'mighty  king 
that  should  stand  up,'  would  appear  im- 
mediately after  the  'fourth,'  and  proba- 
bly that  he  would  be  his  successor  in  the 
realm,  but  it  may  be  remarked  («)  that 
the  languarjehnQ  is  not  inconsistent  with 
the  facts  in  the  case — it  being  literally 
true  that  such  a  'mighty  king'  did 
'stand  up'  who  'ruled  with  great  do- 
minion, and  according  to  his  will;'  {h)  that 
there  was  no  necessity  in  the  prophetic 
history  of  referring  to  the  acts  of  these 
intermediate  kings  of  Persia,  since  they 
did  not  contribute  at  all  to  the  result — it 
being  well  known  that  the  reason  alleged 
by  Alexander  for  his  invasion  of  the  Per- 
sian empire,  was  not  anything  which 
(^e^  had  done,  but  the  wrongs  sustained 
by  Greece  in  consequence  of  the  invasion 
by  Xerxes  and  his  predecessor.  The 
real  succession  of  events  in  the  case  was 
that  last  invasion  of  Greece  by  Xerxes, 
and  the  consequent  invasion  of  the  Per- 
sian empire  by  Alexander.  It  was  these 
transactions  which  the  angel  evidently 
meant  to  connect  together,  and  hence  all 
that  was  intermediate  was  omitted.  Thus 
Alexander,  in  his  letter  to  Darius,  says, 
"  Your  ancestors  entered  into  Macedonia, 
and  the  other  parts  of  Greece,  and  did  us 
dam.age,  when  they  had  received  no  af- 
front from  us  as  the  cause  of  it ;  and  now 
I,  created  general  of  the  Greciiins,  pro- 
voked by  you,  and  desirous  of  avenging 
the  injury  done  by  the  Persians,  have 
passed  over  into  Asia."  Arrian,  Expe. 
Alex.  i.  2.  5[  TItat  shall  ride  with  <jreat 
dominion.  That  shall  have  a  wide  and 
extended  empire.  The  huifjuaije  here 
would  apply  to  any  of  the  monarchs  of 
Persia  that  succeeded  Xerxes,  but  it 
would  be  more  strictly  applicable  to  Al- 
exander the  Great  than  to  any  prince  of 
ancient  or  modern  times.  The  whole 
ivorld,  except  Greece,  was  supposed  to  be 
subject  to  the  power  of  Persia,  and  it  was 
ane  of  the  leading  and  avowed  purposes 
\f  Darius  and  Xerxes  in  invading  Greece, 


^Yinds   of  heaven;  and  not  to  his 

a  c.  8. 4,  &c. 


by  adding  that  to  their  empire,  to  have 
the  earth  under  their  control.  When, 
therefore,  Alexander  had  conquered  Per- 
sia, it  was  supposed  that  he  had  subdued 
the  Avorld,  nor  was  it  an  unnatural  feeling 
that,  having  done  this,  he,  whose  sole 
principle  of  action  was  ambition,  should 
sit  down  and  weep  because  there  were  no 
more  worlds  to  conquer.  In  fact,  he 
then  swayed  a  sceptre  more  extended 
and  mighty  than  any  before  him  had 
done,  and  it  is  with  peculiar  propriety 
that  the  language  here  is  used  in  regard 
to  him.  \  And  do  accordinfj  to  his  icill. 
Would  be  an  arbitrary  prince.  This  also 
was  true  of  the  Persian  kings,  and  of 
Oriental  despots  generally;  but  it  was 
eminently  so  of  Alexander— who,  in  sub- 
duing kingdoms,  conquering  mighty  ar- 
mies, controlling  the  millions  under  his 
sway,  laying  the  foundations  of  cities, 
and  newly  arranging  the  boundaries  of 
empires,  seemed  to  consult  only  his  own 
will,  and  felt  that  everything  was  to  be 
subordinate  to  it.  It  is  said  that  this 
passage  was  shown  to  Alexander  by  ttia 
high  priest  of  the  Jews,  and  that  th"!se 
prophecies  did  much  to  conciliate  his 
favour  towards  the  Hebrew  people. 

4.  And  tchen  he  shcdl  stfind  vp.  In  the 
might  and  power  of  his  kingdom.  When 
his  power  shall  be  fully  established.  J 
undei-stand  this,  with  Rosenmiiller  and 
Iliivernick,  as  meaning,  when  he  shall  be 
at  the  height  of  his  authority  and  power, 
then  his  kingdom  would  be  broken  up. 
The  reference  is,  undoubtedly,  to  the 
sudden  death  of  Alexander,  and  the  sense 
is,  that  his  empire  would  not  gmdiial/tf 
diminish  and  decay,  but  that  some  event 
would  occur  the  effect  of  which  would  be 
to  rend  it  into  four  parts.  ^  His  king- 
dom shall  be  broken.  To  wit,  by  his 
death.  The  language  is  such  as  is  pro- 
perly applicable  to  this,  and  indeed  im- 
plies this,  for  it  is  said  that  it  would  not 
'  be  to  his  posterity' — an  event  which 
might  be  naturally  expected  to  occur 
or,  in  other  words,  the  allusion  to  his  pos- 
terity is  such  language  as  would  bo  em- 
ployed on  the  supposition  that  the  refer- 
ence here  is  to  his  death.  ^  And  shall 
be  divided  toward  the  four  icinda  of  heu 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER  XI, 


posterity,  nor  according  to  his  do- 
minion which  he  ruled :  for  his 
kingdom  shall  be  plucked  up,  even 
for  others  beside  those. 


ven.  Into  four  parts.  For  the  remark- 
able fulfilment  of  this  prediction,  see  the 
Notes  on  ch.  viii.  8.  ^  And  vot  to  his 
posterity.  See  also  the  Notes  on  ch. 
viii.  8.  *[  Nor  according  to  his  dominion 
which  he  ruled.  This  was  literally  true 
of  the  division  of  the  empire.  No  one  of 
his  successors  ever  obtained  as  wide  a 
dominion  as  he  did  himself.  *l  For  his 
kingdom  shall  he  jyhicked  vp.  By  his 
death.  This  does  not  naturally  mean 
that  it  would  be  by  conquest,  for  it  is  said 
that  it  would  be  '  divided  towards  the 
four  winds  of  heaven' — language  which  is 
not  properly  expressive  of  conquest.  All 
that  is  implied  is  met  by  the  supposition 
that  at  his  decease,  the  kingdom,  which 
had  been  founded  by  him,  and  which  had 
been  sustained  by  his  valor  and  political 
wisdom,  would  fall  to  pieces.  ^  Even  for 
others  beside  those.  That  is,  to  others  be- 
side those  to  whom  it  should  be  at  first 
divided.  Literally,  exclusively,  or  to  the 
exclusion  of — 13'7p-  The  word  those  re- 
fers to  his  posterity,  and  the  meaning  is, 
that  the  process  of  division  would  not 
Etop  with  them,  or  that  the  four  portions 
of  the  empire,  as  thus  divided,  would  not 
remain  in  their  hands,  or  pass  to  their 
posterity.  There  would  be  other  changes, 
and  other  divisions;  and  it  was  not  to  be 
expected  that  just  four,  and  no  more,  em- 
pires would  grow  out  of  the  one  which 
had  been  founded,  or  that  when  that  one 
should  bo  divided  into  four  parts,  that 
partition  would  always  continue.  There 
would  be  other  divisions,  and  other  princes 
besides  those  who  first  obtained  the  em- 
pire would  como  in,  and  the  process  of 
division  would  ultimately  be  carried  much 
farther.  It  is  unnecessary  to  say  that 
this  occurred  in  the  empire  founded  by 
Alexander.  It  was,  soon  after  his  death, 
separated  into  four  parts,  but  at  no  dis- 
tant period  this  arrangement  was  broken 
up,  and  all  traces  of  the  empire,  as  estab- 
lished by  him,  or  as  divided  among  his 
four  successors,  wholly  disappeared. 

5.  And  the  king  of  the  south.  The  an- 
gel here  leaves  tho  general  history  of  the 
tmpire,  and  confin-es  himself,  in  his  pre- 


5  f  And  the  king  of  the  sonth 
shall  be  strong,  and  07ie  of  his  prin- 
ces ;  and  he  shall  be  strong  above 
him,  and  have  dominion ;  his  do- 
minion shall  be  a  great  dominion. 


dictions,  to  two  parts  of  it — the  kingdom 
of  the  south,  and  tho  kingdom  of  the 
north;  or  the  kingdoms  to  the  north  and 
the  south  of  Palestine — that  of  Syria  and 
that  of  Egypt ;  or  that  of  the  Seleucida;, 
and  that  of  the  Ptolemies.  The  reason 
why  he  does  this  is  not  stated,  but  it  is 
doubtless  because  the  events  pertaining 
to  these  kingdoms  would  particularly  af- 
fect tho  Jewish  people,  and  be  properly 
connected  with  sacred  historj'.  Comp. 
Notes  on  ch.  viii.  7,  8.  The  'king  of  the 
south'  here  is,  undoubtedly,  the  king  of 
Egj'pt.  This  part  of  the  empire  was  ob- 
tained by  Ptolemy,  and  was  in  the  hands 
of  his  successors,  until  Egypt  was  sub- 
dued by  the  Romans.  Between  the  king- 
doms of  Egypt  and  Sj'ria,  long  and  bloody 
wars  prevailed,  and  the  prospective  his- 
tory of  these  wars  it  is  the  design  of  the 
angel  here  to  trace.  As  the  remainder 
of  the  chapter  refers  to  these  two  dynas- 
ties, to  the  death  of  the  great  persecutor, 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  as  the  events 
referred  to  were  very  important  in  his- 
tory, and  as  introductory  to  what  was  to 
follow  in  the  world,  it  may  be  useful  here, 
in  order  to  a  clear  exposition  of  the  whole 
chapter,  to  present  a  list  of  these  two 
lines  of  princes.  It  is  necessary  only  to 
premise  that  the  death  of  Alexander  tho 
Groat  occurred  B.  C.  323;  of  that  of  his 
brother,  Philip  Aridasus,  B.  C.  31G;  of 
that  of  his  son,  Alexander  iEgus,  by 
Roxana,  B.  C.  309;  and  that  a  short  time 
after  this  (about  B.  C.  306),  the  chief  Ma- 
cedonian governors  and  princes  assumed 
the  royal  title.  The  following  list  of  the 
succession  of  the  Seleucidte  and  the  Pto- 
lemies— or  the  kings  of  the  North  and  the 
South — of  Syria  and  Eg3'pt,  is  copied 
from  Elliott  on  the  Apocalypse,  iv.  123 : 

The  Ftohmies.  The  Seleucidce. 

B.  C.  B.  C. 

323  Ptolemy  Soter,  son  023  Seleucus    Nicator, 

of  Ptolemy  Lagus,  governor  of  Baby> 

governor  of  Egypt.  Ion. 

306 takes   the  312  ...  .  recovers  Ba- 

title  of  king  of  K-  bylon.and  the  .Era 

gypt.  of    the    Seleucida 

begin.'. 
284  Ptolemy  Philadel-  2S0  Antiochus  Sotej. 


436  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  534. 

6  And  in  the  end  of  years  they  shall  come  to  the  king  of  the  nofth 
shall  »join  themselves  together  ;  for 
the   king's   daughter   of  the   south 


phr^.     (It  was  un- 

dei   him   that  the 

Sej/-tuaf:mt    Greek 

translation  of  the 

Old  Testament  was 

made. 
246  Ptolemy    Euer-  261  Antiochus    Theus 

fCetes. 
221  Ptolemy    Philopa- 

ter. 
204  Ptolemy    Epi- 

phanes. 
180  Ptolemy    Philome- 

tor. 


246  Seleucus     Callini- 

eus. 
226  Seleucus  Ceraunus. 


225  Antiochus  the 
Great, 

1S7  Seleucus  Philopa- 
tor. 

175  An  tiochus  Epi- 
phanes. 

1C4  Antiochus  Eupator, 
of  whom  the  Ko- 
mans  assume  the 
guardianship. 

"After  this,  fourteen  more  Syrian  kings 
reigned,  in  reigns  of  short  and  uncertain 
power,  till  Syria  was  occupied  and  formed 
into  a  Roman  province  under  Pompcy,  at 
which  time  the  JEva,  of  the  Seleucidaj  pro- 
perly ends ;  and  six  more  Egyptian  prin- 
ces, to  the  death  of  Ptolemy  Auletes,  who 
dying  B.  C.  51,  left  his  kingdom  and  chil- 
dren to  Roman  guardianship — one  of 
these  children  being  the  Cleopatra  so  fa- 
mous in  the  histories  of  Casar  and  An- 
thony." Elliott,  ut  supra.  %  Shall  be 
strong.  This  is  in  accordance  with  the 
well  known  fact.  One  of  the  most  pow- 
erful of  those  monarchies,  if  not  the  most 
powerful,  was  Egypt.  ^  And  one  of  his 
princes;  and  he  shall  be  strong  above  him. 
The  meaning  of  this  passage  is,  that  there 
would  be  'one  of  his  princes,'  that  is,  of 
the  princes  of  Alexander,  who  would  be 
more  mighty  than  the  one  who  obtained 
Egypt,  or  the  South,  and  that  he  would 
have  a  more  extended  dominion.  The  ref- 
erence is,  doubtless,  to  Seleucus  Nicator, 
or  the  C(in((ueror.  In  the  division  of  the 
empire  he  obtained  Syria,  Babj'lonia,  Me-  { 
dia,  Susiana,  Armenia,  a  part  of  Cappa-  j 
docia,  and  Celicia,  and  his  kingdom ' 
stretched  from,  the  Hellespont  to  the  In- 
dus. See  Notes  on  ch.  viii.  8.  Comp. 
Arrian  Exp.  Alex.  vii.  22,  Appian,  p.  618, 
and  licngerke,  in  loc.  The  proper  trans- 
lation of  this  passage  probably  would  be, 
And  the  king  of  the  South  shall  be 
oaighty.     But    from   among   his   princes 


to  make  an  b  agreement :   but  she 

"  associate.  ^  rights. 


[the  princes  of  Alexander]  also  there 
shall  be  [one]  who  shall  be  mightier  than 
he,  and  he  shall  reign,  and  his  dominion 
shall  be  a  great  dominion.'  It  was  of 
these  two  dominions  that  the  angel  spake, 
and  hence  follows,  through  the  remain- 
der of  the  chapter,  the  history  pertaining 
to  them  and  their  successors.  Seleucus 
Nicator  reigned  from  B.  C.  312  to  B.  C. 
280 — or  thirty-two  years.  In  his  time 
lived  Berosus  and  Megasthenes,  referred 
to  in  the  Introduction  to  ch.  iv. 

6.  And  in  the  end  of  years.  In  the  fu- 
ture periods  of  the  history  of  these  two 
kingdoms.  The  event  here  referred  to 
did  not  occur  during  the  lives  of  these 
two  kings — Seleucus  Nicator  and  Ptolemy 
Soter,  but  in  the  reign  of  their  successors, 
Ptolemy  Philadelphus  and  Antiochus 
Theos  or  Theus.  The  phrase  'the  end 
of  years'  would  well  denote  such  a  future 
period.  The  Vulgate  renders  it,  'after 
the  end  of  years;'  that  is,  after  many 
years  have  elapsed.  The  meaning  is, 
'  after  a  certain  course  or  lapse  of  years.' 
The  word  end  in  Daniel — yp — often 
seems  to  refer  to  a  time  when  a  predicted 
event  would  be  fulfilled,  whether  near  or 
remote;  whether  it  would  be  really  the 
end  or  termination  of  an  empire  or  of  the 
world,  or  whether  it  would  be  succeeded 
by  other  events.  It  would  be  the  end 
of  that  matter — of  the  thing  predicted; 
and  in  this  sense  the  word  seems  to  be 
emploj-ed  here.  Comp.  ch.  viii.  17,  ver. 
13,  of  this  chapter  (margin),  and  eh.  xii. 
13.  ^  They  shall  join  themselves  together. 
Marg.,  associate.  The  meaning  is,  that 
there  would  be  an  alliance  formed,  or  an 
attempt  made  to  unite  the  two  kingdoms 
more  closely  by  a  marriage  between  dif- 
ferent persons  of  the  royal  families.  The 
word  they  refers  to  the  two  sovereigns  of 
Egypt  and  Syria— the  South  and  the 
North,  f  For  the  king's  daughter  of  the 
south  shall  coine  to  the  king  of  the  north 
to  mal-e  an  agreement.  Marg.,  rights. 
The  Hebrew  word  properly  means  recti- 
tudes  or  rights  (in  the  plural — ann'^p); 
but  here  it  seems  to  be  used  in  the  sense 
of  peace,  or  an  alliance.  The  act  of  mak- 
ing peace  was  regarded  as  an  act  of  jus- 
tice, or  doing  i-ight,  and  hence  the  word 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER   XI. 


shall  not  retain  the  power  of  the 
arm  ;  neither  shall  he  stand,  nor  his 
arm  :  but  she  shall  be  given  up,  and 


came  to  be  used  in  the  sense  of  making 
an  alliance  or  compact.  This  idea  wo 
should  now  express  by  saying  that  the 
design  was  'to  make  things  right  or 
straight' — as  if  they  were  wrong  and 
crooked  before,  giving  occasion  to  dis- 
cord, and  misunderstanding,  and  wars. 
The  intention  now  was  to  establish  peace 
jn  a  permanent  basis.  The  compact  here 
referred  to  was  one  formed  between  Bere- 
nice, the  daughter  of  Ptolemy  Philadel- 
phus,  king  of  Egypt,  and  Antiochus 
Theos,  king  of  Syria.  Ptolemy,  in  order 
to  bring  a  war  in  which  ho  was  engaged 
to  an  end,  and  to  restore  peace,  gave  his 
daughter  in  marriage  to  Antiochus,  in 
hopes  of  establishing  a  permanent  peace 
and  alliance  between  the  two  kingdoms. 
One  of  tho  conditions  of  this  alliance 
was,  that  Antiochus  should  divorce  his 
former  wife,  Laodicea,  and  that  the  chil- 
dren of  that  former  wife  should  be  ex- 
cluded from  the  succession  to  the  throne. 
In  this  way  Ptolemj'  hoped  that  the 
kingdom  of  Sj-ria  might  become  ulti- 
mately attached  to  that  of  Egypt,  if  there 
should  be  children  by  the  marriage  of 
Berenice  with  Antiochus.  Ptolemy,  how- 
ever, died  two  j-ears  after  this  marriage 
was  consummated,  and  Antiochus  re- 
stored again  his  former  wife  Laodicea, 
and  put  away  Berenice,  but  was  himself 
murdered  by  Laodicea,  who  feared  the 
fickleness  of  her  husband.  The  oiRcers 
of  tho  court  of  Syria  then  planned  the 
death  of  Berenice  and  her  children,  but 
she  fled  with  them  to  Daphne,  and  was 
there  put  to  death,  with  her  children. 
Appian,  c.  Ixv.  Lengerke,  in  loc.  She 
was  put  to  death  by  poison.  See  Gill, 
in  loc.  ^  But  she  shall  not  retain  the 
power  of  the  arm.  The  word  retain  here 
is  the  same  as  in  ch.  x.  8,  "  I  retained  no 
strength."  The  word  arin,  is  a  word  of 
frequent  use  in  the  Old  Testament,  both 
in  the  singular  and  plural,  to  denote 
strength,  power,  whether  of  an  individual 
or  an  army.  So  Job  xxii.  8,  '  A  man  of 
unii,'  that  is,  strength;  Gen.  xlix.  3i, 
"  The  arms  [power]  of  his  hands  were 
made  strong  by  the  God  of  Jacob." 
Comp.  Isa.  li.  9,  and  Ixii.  8.  It  is  fre- 
uently  used  ii  this  chaT)ter  in  the  sense 
37* 


they  that  brought  her,  and  » he  that 
bega,t  her,  and  he  that  strengthened 
her  in  these  times. 

*  or,  whom  sJie  brought  forth. 


of  strength,  or  poicer.  See  vs.  15,22,  31. 
This  alliance  was  formed  with  the  hope 
that  the  succession  might  be  in  her.  She 
was,  however,  as  stated  above,  with  her 
children,  put  to  death.  While  queen  of 
Syria,  she,  of  course,  had  power,  and  had 
the  prospect  of  succeeding  to  the  supreme 
authorit3\  •[  Neither  shall  he  stand. 
The  king  of  tho  south;  to  wit,  Egypt. 
That  is,  he  would  not  prosper  in  his  am- 
bitious purpose  of  bringing  Syria,  by  this 
marriage  alliance,  under  his  control. 
^  Nor  his  arm.  What  he  regarded  as  his 
strength,  and  in  which  he  placed  reli- 
ance, as  one  does  on  his  arm  in  accom- 
plishing any  design.  The  word  arm  here 
is  used  in  the  sense  of  help,  or  alliance  ; 
that  is,  that  on  which  he  depended  for 
the  stability  of  his  empire.  %  But  she 
shall  he  given  uj).  That  is,  she  shall  be 
given  up  to  death,  to  wit,  by  the  command 
of  Laodicea.  ^  And  theij  that  brought 
her.  That  is,  those  who  conducted  her 
to  Daphne ;  or  those  who  came  with  her 
into  Syria,  and  who  were  her  attendants 
and  friends.  Of  course  they  would  be 
surrendered  or  delivered  up  when  she 
was  put  to  death.  %  And  he  that  begat 
her.  Marg.,  'or,  ichom  she  brought  forth.' 
The  margin  expresses  the  sense  more 
correctly.  The  Latin  Vulgate  is,  adolea- 
centes  ejus.  The  Greek,  ^7  viavi^.  So  tho 
Syriac.  The  Hebrew — n^V\ni — will  ad- 
mit of  this  construction.  The  article  in 
the  word  has  the  force  of  a  relative,  and 
is  connected  with  the  sufifi.x,  giving  it  a 
relative  signification.  See  Ewald,  as 
quoted  by  Lengerke,  in  loc.  According 
to  the  present  pointing,  indeed,  the  literal 
meaning  would  be,  '  and  he  who  begat 
her;'  but  this  pointing  is  not  authorita- 
tive. Dathe,  Bertholdt,  Dereser,  De 
Wctte,  and  RosenmuUer  suppose  that 
the  reading  should  be  niS.^nv  Then  the 
sense  would  be  'her  child,'  or  '  her  off 
spring.'  Lengerke  and  Ewald,  however, 
supposes  that  this  idea  is  implied  in  the 
present  reading  of  the  text,  and  that  n( 
change  is  necessary.  The  oi)vious  mean 
ing  is,  that  she  and  her  child,  or  her  off- 
spring would  be  thus  surrendered.  Tho 
matter  of  fact  was,  that  her  little  son  was 


438 


DANIEL 


[B.  C.  534 


7  But  out  of  a  branch  of  her  roots 
shall  one  stand  up  in  his  ^estate, 
which  shall  come  with  an  army, 
and  shall  enter  into  the  fortress  of 
the  king  of  the  north,  and  shall 
^place,  or,  office  Tcr.  20. 


plain  -witli  her.  See  Prideaux,  Connex. 
III.  120.  ^  And  he  that  strengthened  her 
in  these  times.  It  is  not  known  who  is 
here  referred  to.  Doubtless,  on  such  an 
occasion,  she  would  have  some  one  who 
would  be  a  confidential  counsellor  or  ad- 
viser, and,  whoever  that  was,  he  would 
be  likely  to  be  cut  off  with  her. 

7.  Bnt  out  of  a  branch  of  her  roots. 
Comp.  Notes  on  Isa.  xi.  1.  The  mean- 
ing is,  that  as  a  branch  or  shoot  sjirings 
up  from  a  tree  that  is  decayed  and  fallen, 
Eo  there  would  spring  up  some  one  of  her 
family,  who  would  come  to  avenge  her. 
That  is,  a  person  is  indicated  who  would 
be  of  a  common  stock  with  her;  or,  in 
other  words,  if  taken  strictly,  a  brother. 
The  phrase  'branch  of  her  roots,'  is 
somewhat  peculiar.  The  words  'her 
roots'  must  refer  to  her  family ;  that 
from  which  she  sprung.  AYe  speak  thus 
of  the  root  or  stem  of  a  family  or  house ; 
and  the  meaning  hero  is  not  that  one  of 
her  descendants,  or  one  that  should  spring 
from  her  would  thus  come,  but  a  branch 
of  the  same  family;  a  branch  springing 
from  the  same  root  or  stem.  The  fact  in 
the  case — a  fact  to  which  there  is  un- 
doubted reference  here — is,  that  her  re- 
venge was  undertaken  by  Ptolemy  Eu- 
ergetes,  her  brother.  As  soon  as  he 
heard  of  the  calamities  thathad  come  upon 
her,  ho  hastened  with  a  great  force  out 
of  Egypt  to  defend  and  rescue  her.  But 
it  was  in  vain.  She  and  her  son  were 
cut  off  before  he  could  arrive  for  her 
help,  but,  in  connection  with  an  army 
which  had  come  from  Asia  Minor  for  the 
same  purpose,  he  undertook  to  avenge 
her  death.  He  made  himself  master  not 
only  of  Syria  and  Cilicia,  but  passed  over 
the  Euphrates,  and  brought  all  under 
subjection  to  him  as  far  as  the  river  Ti- 
gris. Having  done  this,  he  marched 
back  to  Egypt,  taking  with  him  vast 
treaeures.  See  Prideaux,  Con.  III.  120, 
121.  fi  Shall  one  stand  np.  Shall  one 
arise.  Notes,  ver.  2.  That  is,  there 
shall  he  one  who  shall  appear  for  that 
kurpose.     \  In  his  estate.     Marg.,  place, 


deal   against   them,  and  shall  pre» 
vail : 

8  And  shall  also  carry  captives 
into  Egypt   their  gods,  with   their 
princes,  and  with  •=  their   precious 
^  vesiels  of  their  desire. 

or  office.  The  word — p — means,  prop- 
erly, stand,  station,  place;  then  base, 
pedestal.  Comp.  vs.  20,  21,  38.  See  also 
Gen.  xl.  13 :  "  In  those  days  Pharaoh 
shall  restore  thee  again  to  thy  place." 
And  again.  Gen.  xli.  13,  "to  my  q^ce." 
Here  it  means,  in  his  place  or  stead. 
That  is,  he  would  take  the  place  which 
his  father  would  naturally  occupy — the 
place  of  protector,  or  defender,  or  avenger. 
Ptolemy  Philadelphus  her  father,  in  fact, 
died  before  she  was  put  to  death,  and  his 
death  was  the  cause  of  the  calamities  that 
came  upon  her,  for  as  long  as  he  lived 
his  power  would  bo  dreaded.  But  when 
he  was  dead,  Ptolemy  Euergetes  stood  up 
in  his  place  as  her  defender  and  avenger. 
^  Which  shall  come  icith  an  army.  As 
Ptolemy  Euergetes  did.  See  above.  He 
came  out  of  Egypt,  as  soon  as  he  heard 
of  these  calamities,  to  defend  her.  f  And 
shall  enter  into  the  fortress  of  the  Icing  of 
the  north.  Her  strongholds.  In  fact,  he 
overran  Syria  and  Cilicia,  and  extended 
his  ravages  to  the  Euphrates  and  the  Ti- 
gris. Polybius  (Hist.  1.  5),  says  that  he 
entered  into  the  fortified  cities  of  Syria, 
and  took  them.  In  the  passage  before 
us,  the  singular — fortress — is  put  for  the 
plural.  \  And  shall  deal  against  them. 
Shall  act  against  them.  Literally,  'shall 
do  against  them.'  ^  And  shall  2}revo.il. 
Shall  overcome,  or  subdue  them.  As 
seen  above,  he  took  possession  of  no  small 
part  of  the  kingdom  of  Sj'ria.  He  was 
recalled  home  by  a  sedition  in  Egypt,  and 
had  it  not  been  for  this,  Justin  says,  he 
would  have  made  himself  master  of  the 
whole  kingdom  of  Seleucus. 

8.  And  shall  also  carry  captive  into  Egypt 
their  gods,  &c.  That  is,  their  idols.  Je- 
rome {in  loc.)  says  that  Ptolemy  took 
with  him  on  his  return,  forty  thousand 
talents  of  silver,  avast  number  of  precious 
vessels  of  gold,  and  images  to  the  num- 
ber of  two  thousand  four  hundred,  among 
which  were  many  of  the  Egyptian  idols, 
which  Cambyscs,  on  his  conquering 
Egypt,  had  carried  into  Persia.  These 
Ptolemy  restored  to  the  temple  to  which 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER    XI. 


439 


vessels  of  silver  and  of  gold  ;  and  he 
shall  continue  more  years  than  the 
king  of  the  north. 

9  So  the  kino;  of  the  south  shall 


10  But  his  sons  shall  »be  stirred 
up,  and  shall  assemble  a  multitude 
of  great  forces:  and  one.  shall  cer- 
tainly come,  and  i*  overflow,  and  pass 


come  into  Im-  kingdom,  and  shall  re-  through :  then  shall  he  <=  return,  and 
turn  into  his  own  land.  |  be  stirred  up,  even  to  his  ^  fortress, 

a  or,  roar.        I'Is.  8.  S;  c.  0.2G.  coT,hc  stirred  up  again.         J  ver.  7. 


they  belonged,  and  by  this  much  endeared 
himself  to  his  people.  It  was  on  account 
of  the  service  which  he  thus  rendered  to 
his  country,  that  he  was  called  Euergetes, 
that   is,  the    Benefactor.     Prideaux  III. 

121.  In  1631  an  inscription  on  an  an- 
cient marble  in  honor  of  this  action  of 
Euergetes,  was  published  by  Allatius : 
Sacris  quce  ah  Egypto  Persce  ahstulernnt 
receptis,  ac  earn  rcliqua  coixjesth  zara  in 
Eyyptum  rclatis.  Wintle.  ^  And  he 
shall  continue  more  years  than  the  king  of 
the  north.  Ptolemy  Euergetes  survived 
Seleucus  about  four  years.     Prideaux  III. 

122.  He  reigned  twenty-five  years. 

9.  So  the  king  of  the  south  shall  come 
into  his  kingdom.  That  is,  into  the  king- 
dom of  the  north,  or  the  kingdom  of 
Syria.  This  verse  seems  to  be  a  summary 
of  wh.at  had  been  said  about  his  invading 
Syria.  He  would  come  on  account  of  the 
wrongs  done  to  his  sister  into  the  king- 
dom of  the  north,  and  would  then  return 
again  to  his  own  land. 

10.  But  his  sons  shall  he  stirred  up. 
Marg.,  'or  war.'  The  Hebrew  word — 
njn^  — from  n^J,  means  to  be  rough ;  then 
in  Piel,  to  excite,  stir  up;  and  then,  in 
Hithpa,  to  excite  oneself,  to  be  stirred 
up  to  anger,  to  make  war  upon,  &c. 
Here  it  means,  according  to  Gesenius 
(Lex.),  that  they  would  be  excited,  or 
angry.  The  reference  here,  according  to 
Lengerke,  Maurer,  Gill,  and  others  is  to 
the  son  of  tho  king  of  the  north,  Seleu- 
cus Callinichus.  Ho  was  killed,  according 
to  Justin  (Lib.  xxvii.  C.  3),  by  a  fall  from 
his  horse.  The  war  with  Egypt  was  con- 
tinued by  his  two  sons,  Seleucus  Cerau- 
nus  and  Antiochus  the  Great,  until  the 
death  of  the  former,  when  it  was  prose- 
cuted by  Antiochus  alone.  See  Prideaux 
III.  136.  Seleucus  Ceraunus  succeeded 
his  father — assuming  the  name  of  Cerau- 
nus, or  the  Thunderer,  but,  dying  soon, 
he  left  the  crown  to  his  brother,  Antiochus 
ihe  Great,  then  only  fifteen  years  of  age, 
by  whom  the  war  with  Egypt  was  suc- 
•essfully  prosecuted.     ^  And  shall  assem- 


hle  a  multitude  of  great  forces.  Against 
Egypt.  In  such  a  war  they  would  natu- 
rally summon  to  their  aid  all  the  forces 
which  they  could  command.  •[  And  one 
shall  certainly  come.  There  is  a  change 
here  in  the  Hebrew  from  the  plural  to  the 
singular  number,  as  is  indicated  in  our 
translation  by  the  insertion  of  the  word 
one.  The  fact  was  that  the  war  was  pros- 
ecuted by  Antiochus  the  Great  alone. 
Seleucus  died  in  the  third  j-ear  of  his 
reign  in  Phrygia,  being  slain,  according 
to  one  report  (Jerome),  through  the  treach- 
ery of  Nicator  and  Apaturius,  or,  accord- 
ing to  another,  was  poisoned.  See  Pri- 
deaux, III.  137.  Antiochus  succeeded  to 
the  empire  and  prosecuted  the  war.  This 
was  done  for  the  purpose  of  recovering 
Syria  from  the  dominion  of  Ptolemy  of 
Egypt,  and  was  conducted  with  various 
degrees  of  success  until  the  whole  was 
brought  under  the  control  of  Antiochus. 
See  Prideaux,  Con.  III.  138.  seq.  ^  And 
overJloiD.  Like  a  torrent.  %  And  pass 
through.  Through  the  land — not  the  land 
of  Egypt,  but  every  part  of  Syria.  ^  Then 
shall  he  return.  Marg.,  he  stirred  up 
again.  The  margin  is  the  more  correct 
rendering — the  Hebrew  word  being  the 
same  as  that  which  is  used  in  the  first 
part  of  the  verse.  The  idea  would  seem 
to  be  that  he  would  be  aroused  or  stirred 
up  after  a  defeat,  and  would  on  the  second 
expedition  enter  into  the  strongholds  or 
fortresses  of  the  land.  This  was  literally 
true.  Ptolemy  marched  into  Syria  with 
an  army  of  seventy  thousand  foot,  five 
thousand  horse,  and  seventy-three  ele- 
phants, and  was  met  by  Antiochus  with 
an  army  of  sixty-two  thousand  foot,  six 
thousand  horse,  and  one  hundred  and  two 
elephants.  In  a  great  battle,  Antiochus 
was  defeated,  and  returned  to  AntiocL 
(Prideaux,  Con.  IIL  151—153),  but  the 
following  year  he  again  rallied  his  forces, 
and  invaded  Syria,  took  Gaza  and  the 
other  strongholds,  and  subdued  the 
whole  country  of  Syria,  including  Pales- 
tine, to  himself.  Prideaux,  Con.  III.  176, 
177.     %  Even  to  his  fortress.    The  singu- 


440 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  534 


11  And  the  king  of  the  south  shall  |  12  And  when  he  hath  taken  away 
be  moved  with  choler,  and  shall  the  multitude,  his  heart  shall  be 
come  forth  and  fight  with  him,  even  lifted  up ;  and  he  shall  cast  down 
with  the  king  of  the  north:  and  he  manij  ten  thousands:   but  he  shall 


^hall  set  forth  a  great  multitude ; 
but  *the  multitude  shall  be  given 
into  his  hand. 

lar  for  the  plural ;  perhaps  using  the  word 
'  fortress'  by  way  of  eminence,  as  de- 
noting his  strongest  fortress,  and  therefore 
including  all  the  others. 

11.  And  the  Icing  of  the  south  shall  be 
moved  with  choler.  AVith  anger.  That  is, 
that  his  provinces  were  invaded,  and  his 
strongholds  taken— referring'  particularly 
to  the  invasion  of  Syria  and  Palestine  as 
mentioned  in  the  previous  verse,  and  the 
attempt  to  wrest  them  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  king  of  Egj'pt.  Nothing  would  be 
more  natural  than  that  this  should  occur. 
^  And  shall  come  forth  and  fight  with  him, 
even  with  the  Icing  of  the  north.  There 
were  frequent  and  almost  constant  wars 
between  these  two  kingdoms.  Yet  the 
reference  here  is  to  Ptolemy  Philopater, 
who  succeeded  Ptolemy  Euergetes  in 
Egypt,  and  who  was  exasperated  at  the 
conduct  of  Antioohus  in  invading  Syria 
and  Palestine.  He  assembled  an  army, 
and  marched  with  it  to  Raphia,  where  he 
met  Antiochus,  and  a  battle  was  fought. 
^  And  he  shall  set  forth  a  great  nudtitnde. 
This  army  of  Ptolemy,  according  to  Po- 
libius,  ch.  86,  was  led  through  Arabia 
Petraa,  and  consisted  of  seventy  thou- 
sand infantry,  and  five  thousand  cavalry, 
and  seventy-three  elephants.  The  army 
of  Antiochus  consisted  of  sixty-two  thou- 
sand foot,  six  thousand  horse,  and  a  hun- 
dred and  two  elephants.  Prideaux,  Con. 
III.  151.  %  But  the  multitude  shall  he 
fjivcn  into  his  hand.  That  is,  the  multi- 
tude of  the  army  of  Antiochus.  In  the 
battle  that  was  fought  at  Raphia,  Ptolemy 
gained  the  victory.  Ten  thousand  of  the 
army  of  Antiochus  were  slain,  four  thou- 
sand taken  prisoners,  and  with  the  re- 
mainder of  his  forces  Antiochus  retreated 
toAntioch.  Prideaux,  III.  152, 153.  Per- [ 
haps  also  the  expression  'the  multitudes 
shall  be  given  into  his  hand,'  may  refer  not 
only  to  the  armj',  and  his  victory  over  it, 
but  to  the  fact  that  the  inhabitants  of  | 
Ccelesyria  and  Palestine  would  hasten  to  . 
submit  themselves  to  him.  After  this  j 
great  battle  at  Raphia,  and  the  retreat  I 


not  be  strengthened  %  it. 

aPs.  S3.  IG;  Ec.  9. 11,  12. 


of  Antiochus,  we  are  told  that  the  cities 
of  Ccelesyria  and  Palestine  vied  with  each 
other  in  submitting  themselves  to  Ptol- 
emy. They  had  been  long  under  the  gov- 
ernment of  Egypt,  and  preferred  that  to 
the  government  of  Antioch.  They  had 
submitted  to  Antiochus  only  by  force,  and 
that  force  now  being  removed,  they  re- 
turned readily  to  the  authority  of  their 
old  masters.  Had  Ptolemy  possessed 
energy  and  capacity  for  government,  it 
would  have  been  easy  to  have  retained 
the  control  over  these  countries. 

12.  And  when  he  hath  taken  away  the 
multitude.  When  he  has  subdued  them. 
Lengerke  however  renders  this,  'And  the 
multitude  shall  lift  themselves  up,'  sup- 
posing it  to  refer  to  the  fact  that  the  peo- 
ple as  well  as  the  king  would  be  excited. 
But  the  more  natural  interpretation  is 
that  in  our  common  version,  and  the 
same  sense  of  the  word  (Nt:'!)  occurs  in 
Amos  iv.  2.  The  reference  is  to  the  effect 
which  would  bo  produced  on  him  after 
his  defeat  of  Antiochus.  ^  His  heart 
shall  be  lifted  up.  That  is,  he  will  be 
proud  and  self-confident.  He  was  a  man 
naturally  indolent  and  eflfeminate — a  most 
profligate  and  vicious  prince.  Prideaux, 
Con.  III.  146.  The  effect  of  such  a  vic- 
tory would  be  to  lift  him  up  with  pride. 
•f  And  he  shall  cast  doicn  many  te)i  thou- 
sands. Or,  rather,  the  meaning  is,  'he 
has  cast  down  many  myriads.'  The  ob- 
ject seems  to  be  to  give  a  reason  why  his 
heart  was  lifted  up.  The  fact  that  ho 
had  been  thus  successful,  is  the  reason 
which  is  assigned,  and  this  effect  of  a 
great  victory  has  not  been  uncommon  in 
the  world.  ^  But  he  shall  not  be  strength- 
ened by  it.  He  was  wholly  given  up  to 
luxury,  sloth,  and  voluptuousness,  and 
returned  immediately  after  his  victory 
into  Egypt,  and  surrendered  himself  up 
to  the  enjoyment  of  his  pleasures.  The 
consequence  was,  that  he,  by  his  conduct, 
excited  some  of  his  people  to  rebellion, 
and  greatly  weakened  himself  in  the  affec- 
tions and  confidence  of  the  rest.    After 


B.  C.  534.] 


Cxi  AFTER  XI. 


1^1 


13  For  the  king  of  the  north  shall 
return,  and  shall  set  forth  a  multi- 
tude greater  than  the  former,  and 
shall  certainly  cume  ^  after  certain 
years  with  a  great  army  and  Avith 
much  riches. 


the  victory,  he  concluded  a  truce  with 
Antiochus  ;  and  the  result  was,  that  his 
people,  wlio  expected  much  more  from 
him,  and  supposed  that  he  would  have 
prosecuted  the  war,  became  dissatisfied 
ifith  his  conduct,  and  broke  out  into  re- 
bellion. As  a  matter  of  fact,  ho  was  less 
strong  in  the  confidence  and  affections  of 
his  people,  and  would  have  been  less  able 
to  wage  a  war,  after  his  triumph  over 
Antiochus  than  he  was  before.  See  Pri- 
ieaux.  Con.  III.  155,  seq. 

13.  Fov  the  Ici'iii/  of  t/ie  north  shall  re- 
riini.  That  is,  he  shall  come  again  into 
the  regions  of  Coelesyria  and  Palestine,  to 
recover  them  if  possible  from  the  power 
of  the  Egyptian  king.  ^  And  shall  set  forth 
a  multitude  greater  than  the  fiirmer.  Thau 
he  had  in  the  former  war  when  he  was 
defeated.  The  fact  was,  that  Antiochus, 
in  this  expiedition,  brought  with  liim  the 
forces  with  which  he  had  successfully  in- 
vaded the  East,  and  the  army  had  been 
raised  for  that  purpose,  and  was  much 
larger  than  that  with  which  he  had  for- 
merly attacked  Ptolemy.  See  Prideaux, 
III.  163 — 165.  ^  And  shall  certainly  come 
after  certain  years  icith  a  great  army. 
This  occurred  B.  C.  203,  fourteen  years 
after  the  former  w.ar.  Prideaux,  III.  19. 
^  With  much  riches.  Obtained  in  his 
conquests  in  Parihia  and  other  portions 
of  the  East.  See  Prideaux,  vt  supra. 
The  history  of  Antiochus  corresponds  pre- 
cisely with  the  statement  here. 

14.  And  in  these  times  there  shall  many 
etand  vp  against  the  king  of  the  south. 
Against  the  king  of  Egj-pt.  That  is,  not 
only  Antiochus  the  Great,  who  was  al- 
ways opposed  to  him,  and  who  was  con- 
stantly waging  war  with  him,  but  also 
others  with  whom  he  would  be  particu- 
larly involved,  or  who  would  be  opposed 
to  him.  The  reference  is  especially  to 
Philip,  king  of  Macedon,  and  to  Agatho- 
cles,  who  excited  a  rebellion  against  him 
in  Egypt.  See  Jerome  on  Dan.  .\i ;  Po- 
lybius,  XV.  20 ;  Lengerke,  in  loc,  and 
Prideaux,  III.  193.  Antiochus  and 
Philip  of  Macedon  entered  into  an  agree- 


14  And  in  those  times  there  shall 
many  stand  up  against  the  king  of 
the  south  :  also  the  ^  robbers  of  thy 
people  shall  exalt  themselves  to  es- 

^at  the  end nf  times,  even  years ;   c.  4.  16  ;  12.  7. 
b  children  of  robbers. 


ment  to  invade  the  dominions  of  Ptolemy 
Epiphanes,  and  to  divide  them  between 
themselves.  At  the  same  time  .a  treasona- 
ble plot  was  laid  against  the  life  of  Ptol- 
emy by  Scopas  the  ^tolian  (Polyb.  xvii.), 
who  had  under  his  command  the  army  of 
the  jEtolians,  and  who  designed  to  take 
advantage  of  the  youth  of  the  king,  and 
seize  upon  the  throne.  This  project  was 
defeated  by  the  vigilance  of  Aristoraenes, 
the  prime  minister.  Prideaux,  III.  181. 
See  also  the  account  of  the  conspiracy  of 
Agathocles,  and  his  sister  Agathoclea, 
against  Ptolemy,  when  an  infant,  in  Pri- 
deaux, III.  168,  seq.  These  facts  fully  ac- 
cordwith  whatissaid  in  thepassage  before 
us.  ^  Also  the  robbers  of  thy  ]}eople  shall 
exalt  themselves.  The  angel  here  turns  to 
Daniel,  and  states  what  would  be  done  in 
these  circumstances  by  his  own  people — ■ 
the  Jews.  It  is  to  bo  remembered  that, 
in  these  times,  they  wera  alternately  un- 
der the  dominion  of  the  Egyptian  and  the 
Syrian  monarehs  of  Ptolemy — or  of  An- 
tiochus. The  principal  seat  of  the  wars 
between  S3-riaand  Egypt  was  Palestine — 
the  border  hand  between  them  and  Judea, 
therefore,  often  changed  masters.  Ptol- 
emy Philopater  had  subdued  Coelesyria 
and  Palestine,  and  Ptolemy  Epiphanes 
came  into  possession  of  them  when  he 
ascended  the  throne.  But  the  angel  now 
sa3-s  that  a  portion  of  his  people  would 
take  occasion,  from  the  weakness  of  the 
youthful  monarch  of  Egypt,  and  the  con- 
spiracies in  his  own  kingdom,  and  the  for- 
eign combinations  against  him,  to  attempt 
to  throw  off  his  authority,  and  to  become 
indepondrnt.  That  part  of  the  people 
who  would  attempt  to  do  this  is  desig- 
nated in  the  common  translation  as,  'the 
robbers  of  thy  people.'  This,  however,  is 
scarcely  a  correct  version,  and  does  not 
properly  indicate  the  persons  that  would 
be  engaged  in  the  plot.  The  marginal 
reading  is,  children  of  robbers.  The  Latin 
Vulgate,  flii  quoque  prcevaricatorum 
populi  tui.  The  Greek  renders  it, 
6t  vioi  T<ov  Xoifirov  Toil  \aov  aov — '  the  sons  of 
the  pests  of  thy  people.'    Lengerke  rcn. 


442 

tablish 
fall. 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  534 


the  vision  ;   but  they  shall 


iKe.  17.17. 


ders  it,  'the  most  powerful  people  of  thy 
nation' — die  gexcaltsainsten  Lente  dcines 
Volkes.  The  Hebrew  word —  fnD  — means 
properly,  rending,  rarcnons — as  of  wild 
beasts,  Isa.  xxxv.  9  ;  and  then  violent,  ra- 
2>acious  ;  an  opjiressor,  robber.  Gesonius, 
Lex.  The  reference  here  seems  to  be  to 
the  mighty  ones  of  the  nation  ;  the  chiefs, 
or  rulers — but  a  name  is  given  them  that 
would  properly  denote  their  character  for 
oppression  and  rapacity.  It  would  seem 
— what  is  indeed  probable  from  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  case — that  the  nation 
was  not  only  subject  to  this  foreign  au- 
thority, but  that  those  who  were  placed 
over  it,  under  that  foreign  authority,  and 
who  were  probably  mainly  of  their  own 
people,  were  also  themselves  tyrannical 
and  oppressive  in  their  character.  These 
subordinate  rulers,  however,  preferred  the 
authority  of  Antioelius  to  that  of  Pto- 
lemy, and  on  the  occasion  of  his  return 
from  the  conquest  of  Coelesyriaand  Sama- 
ria, they  met  him,  and  professed  submis- 
sion to  him.  Josephus,  Ant.  B.  XII.  ch. 
iii.  §  3.  "  The  Jews,"  says  Josephus, 
"  of  their  own  accord,  went  over  to  him, 
and  received  him  into  the  city  [Jerusa- 
lem], and  gave  plentiful  provision  to  his 
army,  and  to  his  elephants,  and  readily 
assisted  him  when  he  besieged  the  garri- 
son which  was  in  the  citadel  of  Jerusalem." 
On  this  occasion,  Josephus  says  that  An- 
tiochus  bestowed  many  favours  on  the 
Jews;  wrote  letters  to  the  generals  of  his 
armies  commending  their  conduct;  pub- 
lished a  decree  respecting  the  piety  of 
the  Jewish  people,  and  sent  an  epistle  to 
Ptolemy,  stating  what  he  had  done  for 
them,  and  what  he  desired  should  be  fur- 
ther done.  See  these  statements  and  let- 
ters in  Josephus,  nt  supra.  <[  To  establish 
the  vision.  That  is,  to  bring  to  pass  what 
is  seen  in  the  vision,  and  what  had  been 
predicted  in  regard  to  the  Hebrew  people. 
Their  conduct  in  this  matter  shall  have  an 
important  bearing  on  the  fulfilment  of 
the  prophecy  pertaining  to  that  people — 
shaJl  be  one  of  the  links  in  the  chain  of 
events  securing  its  accomplishment.  The 
angel  does  not  say  that  it  was  a  part  of 
Sheir  rfes/^ii  to  'establish  the  vision,' but 
inat  that  would  be  the  residt  of  what  they 
€id.    No  doubt  their  conduct  in  this  mat- 


15  So  the  king  of  the  north  shall 
come,  and  cast  up  a  mount,  and  take 


ter  had  a  great  influence  on  the  series  of 
events  that  contributed  to  the  accomplish- 
ment of  that  prediction.  Lengerke  sup- 
poses that  the  '  vision'  here  refers  to  that 
spoken  of  in  ch.  ix.  24.  ^  But  they  shall 
fall.  They  shall  not  succeed  in  the  ob- 
ject which  they  have  in  view.  Their  con- 
duct in  the  afl'air  will  indeed  promote  the 
fulfilment  of  the  'vision,'  but  it  will  not 
secure  the  ends  which  they  have  in  view — 
perhaps  their  own  aggrandizement;  or  the 
favour  of  Antiochus  towards  themselves  ; 
or  the  permanent  separation  of  the  nation 
from  the  Egyptian  rule,  or  the  hope  that 
their  country  might  become  independent 
altogether.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Antio- 
chus subsequently,  on  his  return  from 
Egypt  (B.  C.  19S),  took  Jerusalem,  and 
slew  many  of  the  party  of  Ptolemy,  who 
had  given  themselves  up  to  him,  though 
he  showed  particular  favour  to  those  who 
had  adhered  to  the  observance  of  their 
own  law,  and  could  not  be  prevailed  on 
by  the  king  of  Egypt  to  apostatize  from 
it.  Prideaux,  III.  198,  Jos.  Ant.  B.  xii. 
ch.  V.  ^  3. 

15.  So  the  hi ncj  of  the  north.  Antiochus 
the  Great.  ^  Shall  come.  Shall  come 
again  into  these  provinces.  This  occurred 
after  he  had  vanquished  the  army  of  tho 
Egyptians  at  Paneas.  He  then  took  Si- 
don  and  Para,  and  made  himself  master 
of  the  whole  country.  Prideaux,  III.  198. 
This  happened  B.  C.  198.  Scopas,  a  gen- 
eral of  Ptolemy,  had  been  sent  by  him  into 
Coelesyria  and  Palestine,  with  a  view  of 
subjecting  those  countries  again  to  Egyp- 
tian rule.  He  was  met  by  Antiochus  at 
Paneas,  near  the  sources  of  the  Jordan, 
and  defeated,  and  fled  with  ten  thousand 
men  to  Sidon,  where  he  fortified  himself, 
but  from  whence  he  was  expelled  by  An- 
tiochus. ^  And  cast  iq)  a  mount.  A  for- 
tification. That  is,  ho  shall  so  entrench 
himself  that  he  cannot  be  dislodged.  The 
reference  does  not  seem  to  be  to  any  par- 
ticular fortification,  but  to  the  general 
fact  that  he  would  so  entrench  or  fortify 
himself  that  he  would  make  his  conquests 
secure.  H  And  take  the  most  fenced  cities. 
Marg.,  city  of  munitions.  Heb.,  'city  of 
fortifications.'  The  singular  is  used  here 
in  a  collective  sense;  or  perhaps  there  is 
allusion  particularly  to  Sidon  where  Sco- 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER   XI. 


443 


the  *  most  fenced  cities  :  and  the 
arms  of  the  south  shall  not  with- 
stand, neither  this  chosen  people, 
neither  shall  there  be  any  strength  to 
•withstand. 

16  But  he  that  cometh  against 

*ci(i/ of  munitions.      ^people  of  his  choices. 


pas  entrenched  himself,  making  it  as 
strong  as  possible.  ^  And  the  arms  of 
the  south  shall  not  withstand.  Shall  not 
be  able  to  resist  him,  or  to  dislodge  him. 
The  power  of  the  Egyptian  forces  shall 
not  be  sufficient  to  remove  him  from  his 
entrenchments.  The  Hebrew  is,  'shall 
not  stand  ;'  that  is,  shall  not  stand  against 
him,  or  maintain  their  position  in  his  ad- 
vances. The  word  artns —  n Vt  — is  used 
here  in  the  sense  of  heroes,  tcarriors,  com- 
manders, as  in  Ezek.  xx.^.  22,  24,  25. 
^  Neither  his  chosen  people.  Marg.,  '  peo- 
ple of  his  choice.'  Those  which  he  had 
selected  or  chosen  to  carry  on  the  war — 
referring,  perhaps,  to  the  fact  that  he 
would  deem  it  necessary  to  employ  picked 
men,  or  to  send  the  choicest  of  his  forces 
in  order  to  withstand  Antiochus.  Such 
an  occurrence  is  in  every  way  probable. 
To  illustrate  this,  it  is  only  necessary  to 
say  that  the  Egyptians  sent  three  of  their 
most  distinguished  generals,  with  a  se- 
lect army,  to  deliver  Sidon — Eropus,  Me- 
•nelaus,  and  Damoxenus.  Lengerke,  in 
loc.  ^  Neither  shall  there  be  any  strength 
to  xoithstand.  No  forces  which  the  Egyp- 
tians can  employ.  In  other  words,  An- 
tiochus would  carry  all  before  him.  This 
is  in  strict  accordance  with  the  historj'. 
When  Scopas  was  defeated  by  Antiochus 
at  Paneas,  near  the  sources  of  the  Jordan, 
he  fled  and  entrenched  himself  in  Sidon. 
There  he  was  followed  and  besieged  by 
Antiochus.  The  king  of  Egypt  sent  the 
three  generals  above  named,  with  a  choice 
army,  to  endeavour  to  deliver  Scopas,  but 
they  were  unable.  Scopas  was  obliged 
to  surrender,  in  consequence  of  famine, 
and  the  chosen  forces  returned  to  Egypt. 
16.  But  he  that  cometh  ayainst  him  shall 
do  according  to  his  own  icill.  That  is, 
Antiochus  who  '  came  against'  Scopas, 
the  Egyptian  general,  sent  out  by  Pto- 
lemy. The  idea  is,  that  Antiochus  would 
be  entirely  successful  in  the  countries  of 
Coclesj'ria  and  Palestine.  As  a  matter 
sf  fact,  as  stated  above,  he  drove  Scopas 
•ut  of  those  region^  and  compelled  him 


him  shall  do  according  to  his  own 
will,  and  none  shall  stand  before 
him :  and  he  shall  stand  in  the 
•^glorious  land,  which  by  his  hand 
shall  be  consumed. 

"=  the  land  of  ornament,  or,  goodly  land, 
ver.'ll,  45. 


to  take  refuge  in  Sidon,  and  then  be- 
sieged him,  and  compelled  him  to  sur- 
render. ^  And  none  shall  stand  before 
him.  That  is,  neither  the  forces  that 
Scopas  had  under  his  command,  nor  the 
choice  and  select  armies  sent  out  from 
Egypt  for  his  rescue  under  Eropus,  Meue- 
laus,  and  Damoxenus.  %  And  he  shall 
stand  in  the  fjlorious  land.  M.arg.,  '  the 
land  of  ornament,  or  goodly  land.'  The 
Hebrew  word — ax — means  properly 
splendour,  heautij,  and  was  given  to  the 
holy  land,  or  Palestine,  on  account  of 
its  beauty,  as  being  a  land  of  beauty  or 
fertility.  Comp.  Ezek.  xx.  6,  15  ;  xxvi. 
12 ;  Jer.  iii.  19,  and  Dan.  xi.  45.  The 
meaning  here  is,  that  he  would  obtain 
possession  of  the  land  of  Israel,  and  that 
no  one  would  be  able  to  stand  against 
him.  By  the  defeat  of  Scopas,  and  of  the 
forces  sent  to  aid  him  when  entrenched 
in  Sidon,  this  was  accomplished.  «[  Which 
by  his  hand  shall  be  consumed.  As  would 
be  natural  when  his  invading  army  should 
pass  through  it.  The  angel  does  not 
seem  to  refer  to  any  wanton  destruction 
of  the  land,  but  only  to  what  would  ne- 
cessarily occur  in  its  invasion,  and  in 
securing  provision  for  the  wants  of  an 
army.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Antiochus 
did  many  things  to  conciliate  the  favour 
of  the  Jews,  and  granted  to  them  many 
privileges.  See  Josephus,  Ant.  B.  XII. 
ch.  iii.  ^  3.  But,  according  to  Josephus, 
these  favours  were  granted  subsequently 
to  the  wars  with  Scopas,  and  as  a  com- 
pensation for  the  injuries  which  their 
country  had  suffered  in  the  wars  which 
had  been  waged  between  him  and  Sco- 
pas within  their  borders.  The  following 
language  of  Josephus  respecting  the  effect 
of  these  wars,  will  justify  and  explain 
what  is  here  said  by  the  angel :  "  Now 
it  happened  that,  in  the  reign  of  Anti- 
ochus the  Great,  who  ruled  over  all  Asia, 
the  Jews,  as  well  as  the  inhabitants  of 
Ccelesyria,  suffered  greatly,  and  their 
land  -was  sorely  harassed ;  for  while  ho 
was  at  war  with  Ptolemy  Philopatcr,  and 


444 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534 


17  He  shall  also  set  his  face  ^  to 
enter  AAith  the  strength  of  his  whole 


Tvith  his  son  who  was  called  Epiphanes, 
it  fell  out  that  these  nations  were  equally 
sufferers,  both  when  he  was  beaten,  and 
when  he  beat  the  others:  so  that  they 
were  like  to  a  ship  in  a  storm  which  is 
tossed  by  the  waves  oa  both  sides,  and 
just  thus  were  they  in  their  situation  in 
the  middle  between  Antiochus'  prosperity 
and  its  change  to  adversity."  Aiit.  B. 
XII.  ch.  iii.  §3.  AVhen  Antiochus  was 
successful  against  Scopas,  however,  the 
Jews  "  went  over  to  him,"  says  Josephus, 
"of  their  own  accord,"  and  received  him 
into  Jerusalem,  and  as  a  consequence  of 
the  aid  which  they  rendered  him,  ho 
granted  them  the  favours  and  privi- 
leges mentioned  by  Josephus.  The 
immediate  consequence  of  the  wars,  how- 
ever, was  extended  desolation,  and  it  is 
to  this  to  which  the  passage  before  us 
refers.  Lengerke,  however,  supposes 
that  the  meaning  of  the  passage  is,  that 
the  whole  land  would  be  subdued  under 
him.  The  Hebrew  word  rendered  '  shall 
be  consumed' — rh'y — means  properly  to 
he  completed,  finished,  closed ;  then  to  be 
consumed,  wasted,  spent,  destroyed :  Gen. 
xxi.  15;  1  Kings  xvii.  16;  Jer.  xvi.  4; 
Ezek.  v.  13.  The  destruction  caused  by 
invading  and  conflicting  armies  in  a 
land,  would  answer  to  all  that  is  properly 
implied  in  the  use  of  the  word. 

17.  Me  shall  also  set  his  face.  Anti- 
ochus. That  is,  he  shall  resolve  or  de- 
termine. To  set  one's  face  in  any  direc- 
tion is  to  determine  to  go  there.  The 
meaning  here  is,  that  Antiochus,  flushed 
with  success,  and  resolved  to  push  his 
conquests  to  the  utmost,  would  make  use 
of  all  the  forces  at  his  disposal  to  over- 
come the  Egyptians,  and  to  bring  them 
into  subjection  to  his  sway.  He  had 
driven  Scopas  from  Coeles^'rin,  and  from 
Sidon,  had  subjected  the  land  of  Palestine 
to  his  control,  and  now  nothing  seemed 
to  prevent  his  extending  his  conquests 
to  the  utmost  limits  of  bis  ambition. 
The  reference  here  is  to  a  purpose  of  An- 
tiochus to  wage  war  with  Egypt,  and  to 
invade  it.  Prom  that  purpose,  however, 
ho  was  turned,  as  we  shall  see,  by  his 
wars  in  Asia  Minor,  and  he  endeavoured, 
as  stated  in  the  subsequent  part  of  the 
rerse,  if  not  to  subdue  Egypt  and  to 
•ring  it  under  his   control,  at  least   \r. 


kingdom,  and  •'upright  ones   wilh 

"Pr.  39.  21. 

bor,  much  uprightness,  or,  equal  conditions. 

neutralize  it  so  that  it  would  not  inter 
fere  with  his  wars  with  the  Romans.  If 
his  attention  had  not  been  diverted,  how 
ever,  by  more  promising  or  more  brilliant 
prospects  in  another  direction,  he  would 
undoubtedly  have  made  an  immediate 
descent  on  Egypt  itself.  ^  With  the 
strength  of  his  tchole  kingdom.  Summon- 
ing all  the  forces  of  his  empire.  This 
would  seem  to  be  necessary  in  invading 
Egypt,  and  in  the  purpose  to  dethrone 
and  humble  his  great  rival.  The  armies 
which  ho  had  employed  had  been  sufii- 
cient  to  drive  Scopas  out  of  Palestine, 
and  to  subdue  that  country,  but  obviously 
stronger  forces  would  be  necessary  in 
carrying  the  war  into  Egypt,  and  at- 
tempting a  foreign  conquest.  ^  And  vp- 
right  ones  with  him.  Marg.,  '  or,  much 
vpjrightncss,  or,  equal  conditions.'  The 
Hebrew  word  here  used — ir; — means 
properly  straight,  right;  then  that  which 
is  straight  or  upright — applied  to  per- 
sons, denoting  their  righteousness  or  in- 
tegrity, Job  i.  1,  8 ;  Ps.  xi.  7.  By  way 
of  eminence  it  is  applied  to  the  Jewish 
people,  as  being  a  righteous  or  upright 
people — the  people  of  God — and  is  lan- 
j  guage  which  a  Hebrew  would  naturally 
apply  to  his  own  nation.  In  this  sense 
it  is  undoubtedly  used  here,  to  denote  not 
the  ;:)/o((s portion,  but  the  nation  as  such; 
and  the  meaning  is,  that,  in  addition  to 
I  those  whom  he  conld  muster  from  his 
own  kingdom,  Antiochus  would  expect 
to  be  accompanied  with  large  numbers 
of  the  Hebrews- — the  '  upright' people — 
in  his  invasion  of  Egypt.  This  he  might 
anticipate  from  two  causes,  («)  the  tact 
that  they  had  already  rendered  him  so 
much  aid,  and  showed  themselves  so 
friendly,  as  stated  by  Josephus  in  the 
passage  referred  to  above;  and  (&)  from 
the  benefit  which  he  had  granted  to  them, 
which  furnished  a  reasonable  presump- 
tion that  they  would  withhold  their  aid 
in  his  further  attempts  to  subdue  Egypt. 
The  Jews  might  hope  at  least  that  if 
Egypt  were  subjected  to  the  Syrian 
scei^tre,  their  own  country  lying  between 
;  the  two,  would  be  at  peace,  and  that  they 
would  no  more  be  harassed  by  its  being 
made  the  seat  of  wars — the  battle-field 
of  two  s^reat  contending  powers.  It  was 
!  not  without  reason,  therefore,  that  Antl- 


15.  C.  5;]4.] 


CHAPTER    XI, 


m 


him  ;  thus  sliall  he  do:  and  he  shall !» corrupting  her:  but  she  shall  not 
give  him  the  daughter  of  women,  I  stand  on  his  side,  neither  be  for  him. 

'  to  corrupt 


ochus  anticipated  that  in  his  invasion  of 
Eccypt,  he  would  be  accompanied  and  as- 
sisted by  not  a  few  of  the  Hebrew  peo- 
ple. As  this  is  the  natural  and  obvious 
meaning  of  the  passage,  and  accords  en- 
tirely with  the  sense  of  the  Hebrew  word, 
it  is  unnecessary  to  attempt  to  prove  that 
the  marginal  rending  is  not  correct. 
*f  Thus  shall  he  do.  That  is,  in  the  man- 
ner which  is  immediately  specified.  He 
shall  adopt  the  policy  there  stated — by 
giving  his  daughter  in  marriage  with  an 
Egyptian  prince — to  accomplish  the  ends 
which  he  has  in  view.  The  reference 
here  is  to  another  stroke  of  policy,  made 
necessary  by  his  new  wars  with  the  Ro- 
mans, and  by  the  diversion  of  his  forces, 
in  consequence,  in  a  new  direction.  The 
natural  step,  after  the  defeat  of  the  Egyp- 
tian armies  in  Palestine,  would  have  been 
to  carry  his  conquests  at  once  into  Egypt, 
and  this  he  appears  to  have  contemplated. 
But,  in  the  meantime,  he  became  engaged 
in  wars  in  another  quarter — with  the  Ro- 
mans, and  as  Ptolemy  in  such  circum- 
stances would  be  likely  to  unite  with  the 
Romans  against  Antiochus,  in  order  to 
bind  the  Egyptians  to  himself,  and  to 
neutralize  them  in  these  wars,  this  alli- 
ance was  proposed  and  formed  by  which 
he  connected  his  own  family  with  the 
royal  family  in  Egypt  by  marriage.  ^  And 
he  shall  give  him.  Give  to  Ptolemy.  An- 
tiochus would  seek  to  form  a  matrimonial 
alliance  that  would,  for  the  time  at  least, 
secure  the  neutrality  or  the  friendship  of 
the  Egyptians.  ^  The  daurjhter  of  wo- 
men. The  reference  here  is  undoubtedly 
to  his  own  daughter,  Cleopatra.  The 
historical  facts  in  the  case,  as  stated  by 
Lengerke  {in  loc.),  are  these  : — After  An- 
tiochus had  subdued  Coelesyria  and 
Palestine,  he  became  involved  in  wars 
with  the  Romans  in  Asia  Minor,  in  or- 
ler  to  extend  the  kingdom  of  Syria  to 
the  limits  which  it  had  in  the  time  of  Se- 
leucus  Nieator.  In  order  to  carry  on  his 
designs  in  that  quarter,  however,  it  be- 
€ame  necessary  to  secure  the  neutrality 
or  the  co-operation  of  Egypt,  for  Ptolemy 
would  naturally,  in  such  circumstances, 
favour  the  Romans  in  their  wars  with 
Antiochus.  Antiochus,  therefore,  nego- 
tiated a  marriage  between  his  daughter 
Cleopatra  and  Ptolemy  Epiphanes,  the 
38 


son  of  Ptolemy  Philopater,  then  thirteen 
years  of  age.  The  valuable  consideration 
in  the  view  of  Ptolemy  in  this  marriage, 
was,  that,  as  a  dowry,  Coelesyria,  Sama- 
ria, Judea,  and  Phoenicia,  were  given  to 
her.  Josephus,  Ant.  B.  XII.  ch.  4.  ^  1. 
This  agreement  or  contract  of  marriage 
was  entered  into  immediately  after  the 
defeat  of  Scopas,  B.  C.  197.  The  contract 
was,  that  the  marriage  should  take  place 
as  soon  as  the  parties  were  of  suitable 
age,  and  that  Coelesyria  and  Palestine 
should  be  given  as  a  dowry.  The  mar- 
riage took  place  B.  C.  193,  when  Antio- 
chus was  making  preparation  for  his  wars 
with  the  Romans.  Jahn,  Heb.  Common- 
wealth, ch.  ix.  g  89,  p.  246.  In  this  way, 
the  neutrality  of  the  king  of  Egypt  was 
secured,  while  Antiochus  prosecuted  his 
work  with  the  Romans.  The  appellation 
hero  bestowed  on  Cleopatra — daughter 
of  women — seems  to  have  been  given  to 
her  by  way  of  eminence,  as  an  heiress  to 
the  crown,  or  a  princess,  or  as  the  prin- 
cipal one  among  the  women  of  the  land. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  of  its  reference  to 
her.  ^  Corrvptinfj  her.  Marg.,  as  in  He- 
brew, to  corrupt.  There  has  been  some 
doubt,  however,  in  regard  to  the  word  her, 
in  this  place,  whether  it  refers  to  Cleopatra 
or  to  the  kingdom  of  Egypt.  Rosenmiil- 
ler,  Prideaux,  J.  D.  Michaelis,  Bertholdt, 
Dereser,  and  others  refer  it  to  Cleopatra, 
and  suppose  that  it  means  that  Antio- 
chus had  instilled  into  her  mind  evil  prin- 
ciples in  order  that  she  might  betray  her 
husband,  and  that  thus,  by  the  aid  of  her 
arts,  he  might  obtain  possession  of  Egypt. 
On  the  other  hand,  Lengerke,  Maurcr, 
Be  Wette,  Iliivernick,  Elliott  (Apoealypso 
iv.  130),  and  others,  suppose  that  the  ref- 
erence is  to  Egypt,  and  that  the  meaning 
is  that  Antiochus  was  disposed  to  enter 
into  this  alliance  with  a  view  of  influenc- 
ing the  Egyptian  government  not  to  unite 
with  the  Romans  and  oppose  him;  that 
is,  that  it  was  on  his  part  an  artful  device 
to  turn  away  the  Egyptian  government 
from  its  true  interest,  and  to  accomplish 
his  own  purposes.  The  latter  agrees  best 
with  the  connection,  though  the  Hebrew 
will  admit  of  either  construction.  As  a 
matter  of  fact  both  these  objects  seem  to 
have  been  aimed  at — for  it  was  equally 
true  th^t  in  this  way  he  sought  to  turn 


440  DANIEL.  [B.  C.  5S4 

18  After  tLis  shall  he  turn  his  face  unto  the  isles,  and  shall  take  many : 


away  tbe  Egyptian  government  and  king- 
dom from  its  true  interests,  and  that  in 
making  use  of  his  daughter  to  carry  out 
this  project  it  was  expected  that  she  would 
employ  artifice  to  influence  her  future 
husband.  This  arrangement  was  the 
more  necessary,  as,  in  consequence  of  the 
fame  which  the  Romans  had  acquired  in 
overcoming  Hannibal,  the  Egj-ptiars  had 
applied  to  them  for  protection  and  aid  in 
their  wars  with  Antiochus,  and  offered 
them,  as  a  consideration,  the  guardianship 
of  young  Ptolemj\  This  offer  the  Ro- 
mans accepted  with  joy,  and  sent  M. 
iEmilius  Lepidus  to  Alexandria  as  guar- 
dian of  the  young  king  of  Egypt.  Po- 
lybius  XV.  20,  Appian,  Syriac.  i.  1,  Livy 
xxxi.  14,  xxxiii.  19,  Justin  xxx.  2,  3, 
xxxi.  1.  The  whole  was  on  the  part  of 
Antiochus,  a  stroke  of  policy,  and  it  could 
not  be  accomplished  without  that  which 
■has  been  found  necessary  in  political  de- 
vises— the  employment  of  bribery  or  cor- 
ruption. It  accords  well  with  the  charac- 
ter of  Antiochus  to  suppose  that  he  would 
not  hesitate  to  instil  into  the  mind  of  his 
daughter  all  his  own  views  of  policy.  •[  But 
she  shall  not  stand  on  his  side,  neither  be 
for  him.  That  is,  she  would  become  at- 
tached to  her  husband,  and  would  favour 
his  interests  rather  than  tne  crafty  de- 
signs of  her  father.  On  this  passage,  Je- 
rome remarks:  "Antiochus  desirous  of 
possessing  Syria,  Cilicia,  and  Lycia,  and 
the  other  provinces  which  belonged  to 
Ptolemy,  but  to  extend  also  his  own  scep- 
tre over  Egypt  itself,  betrothed  his  own 
daughter  Cleopatra  to  Pcolemy,  and  pro- 
mised to  give  as  a  dowry  Coelesyria  and 
Judea.  But  he  could  not  obtain  posses- 
sion of  Egypt  in  this  way,  because  Ptol- 
emy Epiphanes,  perceiving  his  design, 
acted  with  caution,  and  because  Cleopa- 
tra favoured  the  purposes  of  her  husband 
rather  than  those  of  her  father."  So 
Jahn,  Heb.  Commonwealth,  p.  246,  says : 
"He  indulged  the  hope  that  when  his 
daughter  became  queen  of  Egypt,  she 
would  bring  the  kingdom  under  his  influ- 
ence ;  but  she  proved  more  faithful  to  her 
husband  than  to  her  father." 

]  8.  After  this  shall  he  turn  his  face  unto 
the  isles.  The  islands  of  the  Mediterra- 
nean, particularly  those  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  and  constituting  apart  of  Greece. 
This  he  did   in  hi»  wars  with  the  Ro- 


mans, for  the  Roman  power  then  compre- 
hended that  part  of  the  world,  and  it  was 
the  design  of  Antiochus,  as  already  re- 
marked, to  extend  the  limits  of  his  em- 
pire as  far  as  it  was  at  the  time  of  Seleu- 
cus  Nicator.  This  occurred  after  the  de- 
feat of  Scopas,  for,  having  given  his 
daughter  in  marriage  to  Ptolemy,  he  sup- 
posed that  he  had  guarded  himself  from 
any  interference  in  his  wars  with  the 
Romans  from  the  Egyptians,  and  sent 
two  of  his  sons  with  an  army  by  land  to 
Sardis,  and  he  himself  with  a  great  fleet 
sailed  at  the  same  time  into  the  JEgean 
.'ea,  and  took  many  of  the  islands  in  that 
sea.  The  war  which  was  waged  between 
Antiochus  and  the  Romans  lasted  for 
three  years,  and  ended  in  the  defeat 
of  Antiochus,  and  in  the  subjugation 
of  the  Syrian  kingdom  to  the  Roman 
power,  though,  when  it  became  a  Roman 
province,  it  continued  to  be  governed  by 
its  own  kings.  In  this  war,  Hannibal,  of 
the  Carthagenians,  was  desirous  that  An- 
tiochus should  unite  with  him  in  carrying 
his  arms  into  Italy,  with  the  hope  that 
together  they  would  be  able  to  overcome 
the  Romans,  but  Antiochus  preferred  to 
confine  his  operations  to  Asia  Minor,  and 
the  maritime  parts  of  Greece,  and  the 
consequence  of  this,  and  of  the  luxury 
and  indolence  into  which  he  sank,  was  his 
ultimate  overthrow.  Comp.  Jahn's  Heb. 
Commonwealth,  pp.  246 — 249.  ^  And 
shall  take  many.  Many  of  those  islands; 
many  portions  of  the  maritime  country 
of  Asia  Minor  and  Greece.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  during  this  war  which  he  waged, 
he  became  possessed  of  Ephesus,  ^tolia, 
the  island  of  Euboea;  when  in  the  year 
191  B.  C,  he  married  Eubia,  a  young 
lady  of  great  beauty,  and  gave  himself 
up  for  a  long  time  to  festivity  .and  amuse- 
ments— and  then  entrenched  himself 
strongly  at  the  pass  of  Thermopylaj.  Af- 
terwards, when  driven  from  that  strong- 
hold, he  sailed  to  the  Thracian  Cherso- 
ncsus,  and  fortified  Sestus,  Abydos,  and 
other  places,  and,  in  fact,  during  these 
military  expeditions,  obtained  the  mas- 
tery of  no  inconsiderable  part  of  the 
maritime  portions  of  Greece.  The  pro- 
phecy was  strictly  fulfilled,  that  he  should 
'  take  many'  of  those  places.  %  But  a 
prince  for  his  own  behalf.  A  Roman 
prince,  or  a  leader  of  the  Roman  armies. 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER  XI. 


447 


but  a  prince  for  his   » own  behalf 
shall  cause  the  i)  reproach  offered  by 


'  him. 


The  reference  is  to  Lucius  Cornelius 
Scipio,  called  Scipio  Asiaticus,  in  contra- 
distinction from  Publius  Cornelius  Scipio, 
called  Africanus,  from  his  conquest  over 
Hannibal  and  the  Carthagenians.  The 
Scipio  here  referred  to  received  the  name 
Asiaticus,  on  account  of  his  victories  in 
the  East,  and  particularly  in  this  war 
with  Antiochus.  He  was  a  brother  of 
Scipio  Africanus,  and  had  accompanied 
him  in  his  expedition  into  Spain  and 
Africa.  After  his  return  he  was  rewarded 
with  the  consulship  for  his  services  to  the 
state,  and  was  empowered  to  attack  An- 
tiochus, who  had  declared  war  against  the 
Romans.  In  this  war  he  was  prosperous, 
and  succeeded  in  retrieving  the  honour 
of  the  Roman  name,  and  in  wiping  off  the 
reproach  which  the  Roman  armies  had 
suffered  from  the  conquests  of  Antiochus. 
When  it  is  said  that  he  would  do  this  '/or 
//)■•■>■  own  bchd//,'  tho  meaning  is,  doubtless, 
that  he  would  engage  in  the  enterprise  for 
his  own  glory,  or  to  secure  fame  for  him- 
self. It  was  not  the  love  of  justice,  or 
the  love  of  country,  but  it  was  to  secure 
for  himself  a  public  triumph — perhaps 
hoping,  by  subduing  Antiochus,  to  obtain 
one  equal  to  that  which  his  brother  had 
received  after  his  wars  with  Hannibal. 
The  motive  here  ascribed  to  this  'prince' 
was  so  common  in  the  leaders  of  the  Ro- 
man armies,  and  has  been  so  generally 
prevalent  among  mankind,  that  there  can 
be  no  hesitation  in  supposing  that  it  was 
accurately  ascribed  to  this  conqueror, 
Scipio,  and  that  the  enterprise  in  which 
he  embarked  in  opposing  Antiochus  was 
primarily  'on  his  own  behalf.'  ^  Shall 
cause  the  reproach  offered  hi/  him  to  cea-ic. 
The  reproach  offered  by  Antiochus  to  the 
Roman  power.  The  margin  is,  'his  re- 
proach.' The  reference  is  to  the  disgrace 
brought  on  the  Roman  armies  by  tho  con- 
quests of  Antiochus.  Antiochus  had 
seemed  to  mock  that  power;  he  had  en- 
gaged in  war  with  the  conquerors  of  na- 
tions; he  had  gained  victories,  and  thus 
appeared  to  insult  the  majesty  of  the  Ro- 
man name.  All  this  was  turned  back 
igain,  or  caused  to  cease,  by  the  victories 
5f  Scipio.  ^  Without  his  own  reproach. 
iVithout  any  reproach  to  hi'mself — any 


him  to  cease;  without  his  own  re- 
proach he  shall  cause  it  to  turn  upon 
him. 

''^  his  reproach. 


discomfiture — any  imputation  of  want  of 
skill  or  valour.  That  is,  he  would  so  con-  • 
duct  tho  war  as  to  secure  an  untarnished 
reputation.  This  was  in  all  respects  true 
of  Scipio.  ^ He  shall  cause  it  to  turn 
upon  him.  The  reproach  or  shame  which 
ho  seemed  to  cast  upon  the  Romans  would 
return  upon  himself.  This  occurred  in 
the  successive  defeats  of  Antiochus  in 
several  engagements  by  water  and  by 
land,  and  in  his  final  and  complete  over- 
'  throw  at  the  battle  of  Magnesia  (B.  C. 
190),  by  Scipio.  After  being  several 
times  overcome  by  the  Romans,  and 
vainly  sueing  for  peace,  "  Antiochus  lost 
all  presence  of  mind,  and  withdrew  his 
garrison  from  all  the  cities  on  the  Helles- 
pont, and,  in  his  precipitate  flight,  left  all 
his  military  stares  behind  him.  He  re- 
newed his  attempts  to  enter  into  negotia- 
tions for  peace,  but  when  he  was  required 
to  relinquish  all  his  possessions  west  of 
the  Taurus,  ;.nd  defray  the  expense  of  the 
war,  he  resolved  to  try  his  fortune  once 
more  in  a  battle  by  land.  Antiochus 
brought  into  the  field  seventy  thousand 
infantry,  twelve  thousand  cavalry,  and  a 
great  number  of  camels,  elephants,  and 
chariots  armed  with  scythes.  To  these 
the  Romans  could  oppose  but  thirty  thou- 
sand men,  and  yet  they  gained  a,  decisive 
victory.  The  Romans  lost  only  three 
hundred  and  twenty-five  men  ;  while,  of 
the  forces  of  Antiochus,  fifty  thousand 
infantry,  four  thousand  cavalry,  and  fif- 
teen elephants,  were  left  dead  on  the  field, 
fifteen  hundred  men  were  made  prisoners, 
and  the  king  himself  with  great  diflnculty 
made  his  escape  to  Sardis.  He  now 
humbly  sued  for  peace,  and  it  was  granted 
on  the  terms  to  which  he  had  formerly 
refused  compliance — that  he  should  sur- 
render all  his  possessions  west  of  the  Tau- 
rus, and  that  he  should  defray  the  ex- 
penses of  the  war.  He  farther  obligated 
himself  to  keep  no  elephants,  and  not 
more  than  twelve  ships.  To  secure  the 
performance  of  these  conditions,  the  Ro- 
mans required  him  to  deliver  up  twelve 
hostages  of  their  own  selection,  among 
whom  was  his  son  Antiochus,  afterwards 
surnamed  Epiphanes."  Jahn's  Heb.  Corn* 
monwealth,  pp.  248,  249. 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534 


19  Then  he  shallturn  his  face  to- 1 1' estate   a  ■=  raiser  of  taxes   in  the 
ward  the  fort  of  his  own  land :  but  glory  of  the  kingdom :  but  within 


ne  shall  stumble  and  fall,  =>  and  not 
be  found. 
20  Then   shall   stand   up  in  his 

*•  Ps.  37.  36.  b  or,  place,  ver.  7. 

19.  Then  he  shall  turn  his  face  toicard 
the  fort  of  his  ou-n  land.  The  strong  for- 
tifications of  his  own  land — for  the  He- 
brew -word  is  in  the  plural.  This  he 
would  do,  of  course,  for  protection.  He 
would  cease  his  attempts  at  conquest,  and 
endeavour  to  find  security  in  his  own  for- 
tresses. As  a  matter  of  fact,  after  this  de- 
feat, Antiochus,  in  order  to  replenish  his 
exhausted  coffers,  and  to  find  the  means 
of  meeting  the  claims  of  the  Romans,  went 
into  certain  provinces  of  his  empire.  He 
attempted  no  other  foreign  wars,  but 
sought  security  in  his  own  dominions. 
^  But  he  shall  stumble  and  fall,  and  not 
be  found.  He  died  in  an  attempt  to  plun- 
der the  temple  of  Elymais.  In  this  he 
provoked  the  people  to  an  insurrection, 
and  was  slain,  together  with  the  soldiers 
who  were  with  him.  What  was  his  mo- 
tive for  plundering  that  temple  is  uncer- 
tain ;  whether  it  was  to  meet  the  demands 
of  the  Romans,  or  whether  it  was  avarice 
(Justin  xxxiii.  2),  but  it  was  in  this  way 
that  he  'stumbled  and  fell,' and  passed 
awsiy.  Jerome,  Com.  in  Inc.,  Diod.  Sic. 
Fragmenta  xxvi.  30,  49,  Justin  xxxii.  2, 
Strabo  p.  744:.  The  prophecy  respecting 
him  terminates  here,  and  the  particulars 
specified  are  as  minute  and  accurate  as 
if  it  had  been  written  after  the  event. 
Indeed,  the  whole  account  is  just  such  as 
one  would  prepare  now  who  should  under- 
take to  express  in  a  brief  compass  the 
principal  events  in  the  life  of  Antiochus 
the  Great, 

20.  Then  shall  stand  vp  in  his  estate 
Marg.,  place.  The  word  used — ]3  — 
means  properly  a  stand,  station,  place, 
(see  Notes  on  ver.  2),  and  the  idea  here  is 
simply  that  he  would  be  succeeded  in  the 
kingdom  by  such  an  one.  His  successor 
would  have  the  character  and  destiny 
which  the  prophecy  proceeds  to  specify. 
•[[  A  raiser  of  ta.vcs.  One  who  shall  be 
mainly  characterized  for  this ;  that  is, 
(vhose  government  would  be  distinguished 
eminently  by  his  efforts  to  wring  money 
out  of  the  people.  The  Hebrew  word — 
tii — means  properly  to  urge,  to  drive, 


few    days   he    shall    be   destroyed, 
neither  in  "*  anger  nor  in  battle. 


<^  one  that  causeth  an  exacter  to  pass  over. 
filled,  171  B.  C.  d  angms. 


Ful 


to  impel,  and  it  is  then  applied  to  one 
who  urges  or  presses  a  debtor,  or  who 
exacts  tribute  of  a  people.  The  word  is 
used  with  reference  to  money  exactions 
in  Deut.  xv.  2,  3:  "Every  creditor  that 
lendeth  aught  unto  his  neighbour,  shall 
not  exact  it  of  his  neighbour  or  brother; 
of  a  foreigner  thou  mayest  exact  it  again." 
So  in  2  Kings  xxiii.  35,  Jehoiakim  taxed  ^ 
the  land  "  to  give  the  money  according 
to  the  commandment  of  Pharaoh;  he  ex- 
acted the  silver  and  the  gold  of  the  people 
of  the  land."  In  Zech.  ix.  8,  "And  no 
oppressor  shall  pass  through  them  any 
more,"  the  same  word  is  used.  Here  it 
denotes  one  who  would  be  mainly  cha- 
racterized by  his  extorting  tribute  of  his 
people,  or  using  means  to  obtain  money. 
^1  In  the  glory  of  the  kingdom.  The  word 
in  here  is  supplied  by  our  translators. 
Lengerke  renders  it,  'who  shall  suffer 
the  ta.x-gatherer  (eintreiber)  to  go  through 
the  glory  of  the  kingdom.'  This  is  evi- 
dently the  meaning.  He  would  lay  the 
richest  and  most  productive  parts  of  his 
kingdom  under  contribution.  This  might 
be  either  to  pay  a  debt  contracted  by  a. 
former  monarch  ;  or  to  carry  on  war  ;  or  to 
obtain  the  means  of  luxurious  indulgence; 
or  for  purposes  of  magnificence  and  dis- 
play. '^  But  within  few  days.  A  compa- 
rative brief  period.  Comp.  Gcn.xxvii.44, 
xxix.  20.  It  is  impossible  from  this  to 
determine  the  precise  period  which  ho 
would  live,  but  the  language  would  leave 
the  impression  that  his  would  be  a  short 
reign.  •[  He  shall  be  destroyed.  Heb., 
shall  be  broJccn.  That  is,  his  power  shall 
be  broken ;  he  shall  cease  to  reign.  It 
would  not  be  certainly  inferred  from  thiii 
that  he  would  be  put  to  death,  or  would 
die  at  that  time,  but  that  his  reign  then 
would  come  to  an  end,  though  it  might 
be  in  some  peaceful  way.  ^  Neither  in 
anger.  Heb.,  angers.  Not  in  any  tu- 
mult or  excitement,  or  by  any  rage  of 
his  subjects.  This  would  certainly  im- 
ply that  his  death  would  be  a  peaceful 
death.  ^  Nor  in  battle.  As  many  kings 
fell.    The  description  would  indicate  a 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER   XI, 


449 


reign  of  peace,  and  one  whose  end  would 
be  peace,  but  who  would  have  but  a 
brief  reign.  The  reference  here  is,  un- 
doubtedly, to  Seleucus  Philopator,  the 
eldest  son  of  Antiochus  the  Great,  and 
his  immediate  successor.  The  fulfilment 
of  the  prediction  is  seen  in  the  following 
facts  in  regard  to  him  :  (a)  As  an  exac- 
tor of  tribute.  lie  was  bound  to  pay 
the  tribute  which  his  father  had  agreed 
to  pay  to  the  Romans.  This  tribute 
amounted  to  a  thousand  talents  annually, 
and  consequently  made  it  necessary  for 
him  to  apply  his  energies  to  the  raising 
of  that  sum.  The  Jewish  talent  of  silver 
was  equal  to  about  $1505  of  our  money, 
and  consequently  this  thousand  talents, 
of  the  Jewish  talent  of  silver  here  referred 
to,  was  equal  to  about  a  million  and  a 
half  of  dollars.  The  Greek  talent  of  sil- 
ver was  worth  $1055  of  our  money,  and, 
if  this  was  the  talent,  the  sum  would  be 
about  a  million.  To  raise  this,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  ordinary  expenses  of  the  go- 
vernment, would  require  an  effort,  and, 
as  this  was  continued  from  year  to  year, 
and  as  Seleucus  was  known  for  little  else, 
it  was  not  unnatural  that  ho  should  be 
characterized  as  the  'raiser  of  taxes.' 
(i)  Especially  would  this  be  true  in  the 
estimation  of  the  Jews,  for  no  small  part 
of  these  taxes,  or  this  revenue,  was  de- 
rived from  Palestine.  Seleucus,  taking 
advantage  of  the  disturbances  in  Egypt, 
had  reunited  to  the  Syrian  crown  the 
provinces  of  Coelesyria  and  Palestine, 
which  his  father  Antiochus  the  Great  had 
given  in  dowry  to  his  daughter  Cleopatra, 
who  was  married  to  Ptolemy  Epiphanes. 
Jahn,  Heb.  Commonwealth,  p.  255.  In 
the  year  176  B.  C,  Simon,  a  Benja- 
minite,  who  became  governor  of  the  tem- 
ple at  Jerusalem,  the  farmer  of  the  reve- 
nues of  the  Egyptian  kings,  attempted 
to  make  some  innovations,  which  were 
steadily  resisted  by  the  high  priest 
Onias  III.  Simon,  in  anger,  went  to 
ApoUonius,  governor  of  Coelesyria  under 
Seleucus,  and  informed  him  of  the  great 
treasures  contained  in  the  temple.  '"  The 
king,"  says  Jahn,  (Heb.  Commonwealth, 
p.  255,)  ''though  a  friend  to  the  Jews, 
and  though  he  had  regularly  made  dis- 
bursements, according  to  the  directions 
ot  his  father,  towards  sustaining  the  ex- 
penses  of  the  sacrifices  at  Jerusalem,  de-  ' 
termined  to  apply  to  his  own  use  the  ' 
treasures  of  the  temple ;  for  the  .annual  | 
38  * 


payment  of  one  thousand  talents  to  the  Ro- 
mans had  reduced  his  finances  to  a  very 
low  ebb.  With  the  design,  therefore,  of 
replenishing  his  exhausted  treasury,  he 
sent  Heliodorus  to  Jerusalem  to  plunder 
the  temple."  Comp.  Appian  Syriac.  xlv. 
60 — 65.  See  also  Prideaux,  Conn.  III.  208, 
2  Mac.  iii.  Besides  this,  the  necessity 
of  raising  so  much  revenue,  would  give 
him  the  character  of  'raiser  of  taxes.' 
(c)  This  was  done  in  what  might  properly 
be  termed  'the  glory  of  his  kingdom,' 
or  in  what  would,  in  the  language  of  an 
Hebrew,  be  so  called — Coelesyria  and 
Palestine.  To  the  eye  of  a  Hebrew  this 
was  the  glory  of  all  lands,  and  the  Jew- 
ish writers  were  accustomed  to  desi"-nate 
it  by  some  such  appellation.  Comp. 
Notes  on  ver.  16.  (rf)His  reign  con- 
tinued but  a  short  time — answering  to 
what  is  here  said,  that  it  would  be  for  a 
'few  days.'  In  fact,  he  reigned  but 
eleven  or  twelve  years,  but  that,  com- 
pared with  the  long  reign  of  Antiochus 
his  father — thirty-seven  years — was  a 
brief  period.  (e)  The  manner  of  his 
death.  He  did  not  fall  in  battle,  nor 
was  he  cut  off  in  a  popular  tumult.  He 
was,  in  fact,  poisoned.  In  the  eleventh 
year  of  his  reign,  he  sent  his  only  son 
Demetrius  as  a  hostage  to  Rome,  and  re- 
leased his  brother  Antiochus,  who  had 
resided  twelve  years  in  that  city.  As 
the  heir  to  the  crown  was  now  out  of 
the  way,  Heliodorus  sought  to  raise  him- 
self to  the  royal  dignity,  and  for  this 
purpose  ho  destroyed  the  king  by  poi- 
son. He  attached  a  large  party  to  his 
interests,  and  finally  gaine<l  over  those 
who  were  in  favour  of  submitting  to  the 
king  of  Egypt.  Antiochus  Epiphanes  re- 
ceived notice  of  these  transactions  while 
he  was  at  Athens  on  his  return  from 
Rome.  He  applied  himself  to  Euraenes, 
king  of  Pergamus,  whom,  with  his  bro- 
ther Attains,  he  easily  induced  to  espouse 
I  his  cause,  and  they,  with  the  help  of  a 
part  of  the  Syrians,  deprived  Heliodorus 
of  his  usurped  authority.  Thus,  in  the 
year  175  B.  C,  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
quietly  ascended  the  throne,  while  the 
lawful  heir,  Demetrius,  was  absent  at 
Rome.  Appian,  Syriac.  xlv.  60—05, 
Jahn,  Heb.  Commonwealth  ch.  ix.  ^  'Jl. 
The  remainder  of  this  chapter  is  occupied 
with  a  detail  of  the  crimes,  the  cruelties, 
and  the  oppressions  of  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes, or  Antiochus  IV, 


i&O 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  534 


21  If  And  in  his  'estate  shall  stand  not  give  the  honour  of  the  kingdom : 

but  he  shall  come  in  peaceably,  and 
obtain  the  kingdom  by  flatteries. 


up  a  vile  person,  to  whom  they  shall 
^place.  ver.  7. 

21.  Atid  in  his  estate.  In  his  place. 
Notes  on  vs.  2,  20.  ^  Shall  stand  vp  a 
vile  person.  There  shall  succeed  to  the 
throne.  The  reference  here  is  to  Antio- 
chus  Epiphanes,  who  reigned  from  B.  C. 
175  to  B.  C.  163.  The  epithet  '  vile'  here 
given  him,  was  one  which  his  subsequent 
history  showed  was  eminently  appropriate 
to  him  in  all  respects,  as  a  man  and  as  a 
prince.  The  Hebrew  word  rendered  '  vile' 
—  r\i3o — properly  means  one  despised  or 
held  in  contempt.  Isa.  xlix.  7,  Ps.  xxii.  7. 
The  meaning  here  is,  that  he  was  one  who 
deserved  to  be  despised,  and  who  would 
be  held  in  contempt — a  man  of  a  low,  base, 
contemptible  character.  Vulg.,  dcspcctiis. 
Gr.,  i^ovdevcJSiT  Luther,  ein  nurfcachtetcr. 
Never  were  terms  better  applied  to  a  man 
than  these  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes — both 
before  and  after  his  ascension  to  the 
throne.  The  manner  of  his  seizing  upon 
the  crown  is  stated  above.  He  was  sur- 
named  Epiphanes  ('ETri^ai/ijj)  the  Illustri- 
ous, because,  if  we  believe  Appian,  he 
vindicated  the  claims  of  the  royal  family 
against  the  usurpations  of  the  foreigner 
Heliodorus.  Ho  also  bore  the  name  etdj 
— God,  which  is  still  seen  upon  his  coins. 
But  by  his  subjects  ho  was  called  Epi- 
manes  ('En-i^/aii/jj)  the  Insane,  instead  of 
Ejyiphanes — a  name  which  ho  much  more 
richly  deserved.  The  following  state- 
ment from  Jahn  (Heb.  Commonwealth, 
eh.  X.  §  92)  will  show  with  what  propriety 
the  term  '  vile'  was  applied  to  him  :  "  He 
often  lounged  like  a  mere  idler  about  the 
streets  of  Antioch,  attended  by  two  or 
three  servants,  and  not  deigning  to  look 
at  the  nobles;  would  talk  with  goldsmiths 
and  other  mechanics  in  their  workshops, 
engage  in  idle  and  trifling  conversation 
with  the  lowest  of  the  people,  and  mingle 
in  the  society  of  foreigners  and  men  of 
the  vilest  character.  He  was  not  ashamed 
to  go  into  the  dissipated  circles  of  the 
young,  to  drink  and  carouse  with  them, 
and  to  assist  their  merriment  by  singing 
songs  and  playing  on  his  flute.  He  often 
appeared  in  the  public  baths  among  the 
common  people,  engaged  in  every  kind  of 
foolish  jest  without  the  least  regard  to  the 
dignity  of  his  station  and  character.  Not 
unfroquently  he  was  seen  drunk  in  the 


streets,  when  he  would  throw  his  money 
about,  and  practice  various  other  fooler- 
ies equally  extravagant.  He  would  pa- 
rade the  streets  of  his  capitol  in  a  long 
robe,  and  with  a  garland  of  roses  upon 
his  head,  and  if  any  attempted  to  pass  by 
or  to  follow  him,  he  would  pelt  them  with 
stones  which  ho  carried  concealed  under 
his  garments,"  &c.  See  also  Appian  in 
Syriacis  xlv.  70 — 75;  Eusebius  in  Chro- 
nicon  ;  Athena3us,  lib.  v.  p.  193,  x.  p.  438  ; 
Livyxli.  20;  Diod.  Sic.  Erag.  xxvi.  65, 
xxxi.  7,  8;  Prideaux  Con.  iii.  212 — 214; 
1  Mac.  i.  9.  1  To  whom  they  shall  not 
give  the  honour  of  the  kingdom.  That  is, 
the  people.  Or,  in  other  words,  it  should 
not  be  conferred  on  him  by  any  law  or 
act  of  the  nation,  or  in  any  regular  suc- 
cession or  claim.  The  true  heir  to  the 
crown  was  Demetrius,  who  was  absent  at 
Piome.  On  him  the  crown  would  have 
regularly  devolved;  but  in  his  absence  it 
was  obtained  by  Antiochus  by  arts  which 
he  practised,  and  not  by  any  voluntary 
grant  of  the  nation.  ^  But  he  shall  come 
in  })eaceahli/.  Quietly;  without  war  or 
force  ;  by  art  rather  than  by  arms.  Ge- 
senius  {Lex.)  renders  the  phrase  here 
used,  'in  the  midst  of  security;'  that  is, 
unexpectedly,  suddenly.  The  idea  seema 
to  be  that  he  would  do  it  when  the  nation 
was  not  expecting  it,  or  apprehending  it; 
when  they  would  be  taken  off  their  guard, 
and  he  would  '  steal  a  march  upon  them.' 
All  this  accorded  with  fact.  The  na- 
tion seemed  not  to  have  anticipated  that 
Antiochus  would  attempt  to  ascend  the 
throne  on  the  death  of  his  brother.  But 
he  quietly  left  Rome — while  Demetrius, 
his  nephew,  the  true  heir  to  the  crown, 
remained  there — came  to  Athens,  and 
learned  what  was  the  state  of  things  in 
Syria,  where  Heliodorus  had  usurped  the 
authority  ;  made  an  agreement  with  the 
king  of  Pergamus  to  aid  him,  and,  by 
the  assistance  of  a  part  of  the  Syrians 
who  were  opposed  to  the  usurper  Helio- 
dorus, deprived  him  of  the  authority,  and 
himself  took  possession  of  the  crown.  No 
one  seemed  to  suspect  that  this  was  his 
aim,  or  to  doubt  that  his  object  was  to 
remove  an  usurper  that  his  nephew  mighi 
be  placed  on  the  throne.  ^  And  obtain 
the  kingdom  by  flatteries.     nip';p'?n — lu- 


B.  C.  53^.j 


CHAPTER    XI. 


451 


22  And  » with  the  arms  of  a  flood 
shall  they  be  overflown  from  before 

»  vcr.  10.    Fulfilled,  170  B.  C. 

bricitates,  hlanditice.  "  The  word,"  says 
Elliott  (Apoc.  iv.  133),  "has  a  double 
sense,  being  applied  both  to  the  slipperi- 
ness  of  a  path,  and  the  slipperiness  or 
flattering  and  deceit  of  the  tongue.  In 
the  former  sense  it  occurs  in  Ps.  xxxv.  6, 
'Let  their  way  be  dark  and  slippery;'  in 
the  latter,  its  originating  verb,  Prov.  ii.  6, 
vii.  5,  '  The  stranger  that  flattereth  or 
dissembleth  with  his  words  ;'  and  Prov. 
xxix.  5,  'A  man  that  flattereth  or  dissem- 
bleth to  his  neighbour.'  In  this  latter 
sense  the  verbal  seems  to  bo  used  both 
here  and  in  the  verses  32,  34,  below, 
'arts  of  dissimulation.'  Gesenius."  The 
probable  meaning  here  is,  that  ho  would 
obtain  the  throne  by  acts  of  dissembling, 
and  by  promises  of  rewards  and  ofiices. 
Such  promises  he  would  probably  make 
to  Eumenes,  king  of  Pergamus,  and  to 
the  Syrian  nobles  and  people  who  espoused 
his  cause.  It  would  not  be  difiicult  to  se- 
cure the  aid  of  multitudes  in  this  way, 
and  the  character  of  Antiochus  was  just 
such  as  to  permit  him  to  use  any  of  these 
arts  to  aecomplish  his  ends.  Perhaps 
also  he  might  hold  out  the  hope  of  aid 
from  the  Romans,  with  whom  he  had 
long  lived.  It  was  no  uncommon  thing  for 
an  usurper  to  make  his  way  by  flattering 
certain  classes  of  a  people,  and  by  pro- 
mises of  largesses,  of  oSices,  and  of  the 
removal  of  oppressive  burdens.  Comp. 
Pridcau.x,  Con.  III.  212.  8te  also  the 
case  of  Absalom  in  2  Sam.  xv.  1 — 6. 

22.  And  with  the  arms  of  a  Jiood.  The 
reference  here  is  to  some  mighty  invasion 
of  some  country  by  Antiochus,  which 
would  sweep  every  thing  before  him. 
There  seems  to  be  some  confusion  of  me- 
taphor in  the  phrase  '  the  arms  of  a  flood.' 
The  idea  in  the  mind  of  the  writer  ap- 
pears to  have  been  this.  He  saw  an  in- 
vasion of  some  country  by  hosts  of  men 
under  the  command  of  Antiochus.  This 
it  was  not  unnatural  to  compare  with  an 
inundation  of  waters  spreading  over  a 
land.  See  Isa.  viii.  8.  Nor  was  it  alto- 
gether unnatural  to  speak  of  an  inunda- 
tion as  having  arms  extending  far  and 
near;  sweeping  every  thing  to  itself,  or 
carrying  it  away.  Thus  we  speak  of  an 
arm  of  the  sea,  an  arm  of  a  river,  <tc. 
In  this  manner  the  inundation — the  in- 


him,  and  shall  be  broken  ;  yea,  also 
the  prince  of  the  covenant. 

23  And  after  the  league  7nade  with 

vasion — seemed  to  spread  itself  out  like 
waters,  sweeping  all  away.  «f  Shall  they 
he  overflown  from  before  him.  The  pro- 
phet does  not  specify  loho  they  would  be 
that  would  thus  be  overthrown.  Some 
have  supposed  that  the  reference  is  to  tho 
Hebrew,  but  the  more  correct  interpreta- 
tion is  that  which  refers  it  to  Egypt.  See 
Notes  on  ver.  25.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
the  forces  of  Heliodorus,  tho  forces  of  the 
Hebrews,  and  the  forces  of  the  Egyptians, 
were  alike  broken  and  scattered  before 
him.  The  eye  of  the  prophet,  however, 
seems  rather  here  to  bo  on  the  invasion 
of  Egypt,  which  was  one  of  the  earliest 
and  most  prominent  acts  of  Antiochus, 
and  into  the  history  of  which  the  prophet 
goes  most  into  detail.  «f  Yea,  also,  the 
prince  of  the  covenant.  Ho  also  shall  be 
broken  and  overcome.  There  has  been 
some  diversity  of  opinion  as  to  who  is 
meant  by  'the  prince  of  the  covenant' 
here.  Many  suppose  that  it  is  the  high 
priest  of  the  Jews,  as  being  the  chief 
prince  or  ruler  under  tho  'covenant' 
which  God  made  with  them,  or  among 
the  '  covenant'  people.  But  this  appella- 
tion is  not  elsewhere  given  to  the  Jewish 
high  priest,  nor  is  it  such  as  could  with 
much  propriety  be  applied  to  him.  The 
reference  is  rather  to  the  king  of  Egypt, 
with  whom  a  covenantor  compact  had  been 
made  by  Antiochus  the  Great,  and  who 
was  supposed  to  be  united,  therefore,  to 
the  Syrians  by  a  solemn  treaty.  See 
Lengerke,  in  loc.  So  Elliott,  Apoc.  iv. 
133. 

23.  And  after  the  league  made  with  him. 
A  treaty  of  peace  and  concord.  Tho 
great  subject  of  contention  between  the 
kings  of  Syria  and  Egypt  was  the  posses- 
sion of  Cojlesyria  and  Palestine.  This 
they  often  endeavoured  to  settle  by  con- 
quest, as  each  of  them  claimed  that  in  the 
original  partition  of  the  empire  of  Alex- 
andria this  portion  of  the  empire  fell  to 
himself;  and  often  they  endeavoured  to 
settle  it  by  treaty.  Consequently  this 
region  was  constantly  passing  from  one  to 
the  other,  and  was  also  the  seat  of  fre- 
quent wars.  The  'league'  here  referred 
to  seems  to  have  been  that  respecting  this 
country — the  successive  promises  which 
had  been  made  to  the  king  of  Egypt  that 


452 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534 


him  he  shall  Avork  ^  deceitfully:  for 
he  shall  come  up,  and  shall  become 
strong  with  a  small  people. 

Coelesyria  and  Palestine  should  be  made 
over  to  him.  These  provinces  had  been 
secured  to  Ptolemy  Lagus  by  the  treaty 
made  301  B.  C,  and  they  had  been  again 
pledged  by  Antiochus  the  Great,  in  dowrj', 
when  his  daughter  Cleopatra  should  be 
made  queen  of  Egypt.  Jahn,  Ileb.  Com- 
monwealth p.  2G0.  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
however,  was  by  no  means  disposed  to 
confirm  this  grant,  and  hence  the  wars 
in  which  he  was  involved  with  the  Egj'p- 
tians.  •[  He  shall  icork  deceitfuUij.  In 
reference  to  the  covenant  or  treaty  above 
referred  to.  He  shall  endeavour  to  evade 
its  claims;  he  shall  refuse  to  comply  with 
its  conditions  ;  he  shall  not  deliver  up  the 
provinces  according  to  the  terms  of  the 
co-mpact.  The  history  accords  exactly 
with  this,  for  he  did  not  intend  to  com- 
ply with  the  terms  of  the  treaty,  hut 
sought  every  means  to  evade  it,  and  finally 
waged  a  succession  of  bloody  wars  with 
Egypt.  In  reference  to  the  terms  of  this 
treaty,  and  to  secure  their  respective  in- 
terests, both  parties  sent  ambassadors  to 
Rome  to  urge  their  claims  before  the  Ro- 
man Senate.  Polybius,  Legat.  ^  78,  82. 
Jerome,  Com.  ?"?!  loc.  As  soon  as  Ptolemy 
Philometor  had  reached  his  fourteenth 
year,  he  was  solemnly^  invested  with  the 
government;  and  ambassadors  from  all 
surrounding  countries  came  to  congratu- 
late him  on  his  accession  to  the  throne. 
''  On  this  occasion  Antiochus  sent  to 
Egypt,  Apollonius,  the  son  of  Mnestheus, 
apparently  to  congratulate  the  king  on 
bis  coronation,  but  with  the  real  intention 
of  sounding  the  purposes  of  the  Egyptian 
court.  When  Apollonius  on  his  return 
informed  Antiochus  that  he  was  viewed  as 
an  enemy  by  the  Egyptians,  he  immedi- 
ately sailed  to  Joppa  to  survey  his  fron- 
tiers towards  Egypt,  and  to  put  them  in 
a  state  of  defence."  Jahn,  Heb.  Common- 
wealth, p.  260.  2Mac.  iv.  21.  The  purpose 
of  Antiochus  was  undoubtedly  not  to  sur- 
render Coelcsyria  and  Palestine  according 
to  the  treaties  which  had  been  made,  and 
yet  he  designed  to  secure  them  if  possible 
without  an  open  rupture,  and  hence  his 
tirts  of  diplomacy,  or  his  efforts  to  evade 
compliance  with  the  terms  of  the  com- 
pact. Even  when  he  had  invaded  Egypt, 
and  had  obtained  possession  of  the  king, 


24  He  shall  enter  ^  peaceably  ever 
upon  the  fattest  places  of  the  prov- 

*  c.  8.  25.        l'  or,  into  the  peaceable  and  fat. 


Ptolemy  Philometor,  he  still  "pretended 
that  he  had  come  ^o  Egypt  solely  for  the 
good  of  king  Ptolemy,  to  set  the  affairs  of 
his  kingdom  in  order  for  him;  and  Ptol- 
emy found  it  expedient  to  act  as  though 
he  really  thought  him  his  friend.  But  he 
must  have  seen,  says  Jahn,  that  Antio- 
chus with  all  his  professions  of  friendship, 
was  not  unmindful  of  spoil,  for  he  plun- 
dered Egypt  in  every  quarter."  Heb. 
Commonwealth  p.  2C3.  ^  For  he  shall 
come  tip.  Come  up  on  Egypt.  The  result 
would  be  war.  Rather  than  surrender 
the  provinces  according  to  the  treaty,  ho 
would  ultimately  invade  Egypt,  and  carry 
war  into  its  borders.  ^  And  shall  become 
stro>}g  with  a  small  people.  The  meaning 
of  this  seems  to  be  that  at  first  his  own 
forces  would  be  small ;  that  he  would 
go  up  in  such  a  way  as  not  to  excite  sus- 
picion, but  that,  either  by  an  increase  of 
his  forces  there,  by  uniting  himself  to 
confederates,  by  alluring  the  people  by 
the  promise  of  rewards,  or  by  gradually 
taking  one  town  after  another  and  adding 
them  to  his  dominions,  he  would  become 
strong  then.  Jahn  (Heb.  Commonwealth 
p.  263),  says,  "  teith  a  small  body  of  troops 
he  made  himself  master  of  Memphis,  and 
of  all  Egypt  as  far  as  Alexandria,  almost 
without  striking  a  blow."  Comp.  Diod. 
Sic.  xxvi.  75,  77  ;  Jos.  Ant.  sii.  5,  2.  Tho 
fact  in  the  case  was,  that  Antiochus  pre- 
tended in  his  invasion  of  Egypt  to  be  the 
friend  of  the  Egyptian  king,  and  that  he 
came  to  aid  him,  and  to  settle  him  firmly 
on  the  throne.  By  degrees,  however,  he 
became  possessed  of  one  town  after  an- 
other, and  subdued  one  place  after  an- 
other, until  he  finally  became  possessed 
of  the  king  himself,  and  had  him  entirely 
in  his  power. 

24.  He  shall  enter  peaceably  even  vpon 
the  fattest  places  of  the  province.  The 
margin  is,  '  into  the  peaceable  and  fat.' 
The  version  in  the  text,  however,  is  the 
more  correct,  and  tho  sense  is  that  he 
would  do  this  unexpectedhj  (Lengerke, 
vnvermuthet) ;  he  would  make  gradual 
and  artful  approaches  until  he  had  seized 
upon  the  best  portions  of  the  land.  Comp. 
Gen.  xxvii.  28,  39.  The  history  is,  that 
he  went  there  with  diflerent  professions 
than  those  of  conquest^  and  one  after  on- 


B.  C.  534.J 


CHAPTER    XI, 


455 


ince  ;  and  he  .shall  do  tliat  which  his 
fathers  have  not  done,  nor  his  fa- 
ther's fathers ;  he  shall  scatter 
among  them  the  prey,  and  spoil, 
and  riches :  yea  he  shall  » forecast 

a  think  his  thoughts. 

Other  he  took  possession  of  the  principal 
towns  of  Egypt.  In  his  first  invasion  of 
that  country,  Diodorus  Siculus  and  Jose- 
phus  both  say  that  Antiochus  '  availed 
himself  of  a  mean  artifice,'  without  speci- 
fying what  it  was.  Jahn  says  that  prob- 
ably it  was  that  he  pretended  to  come  as 
the  friend  of  Ptolemy.  It  was  to  this 
that  the  allusion  is  here,  when  it  is  said 
that  he  would  '  cuter  peaceahli/,' — that  is, 
with  some  pretence  of  peace  or  friendship, 
or  with  some  false  and  flattering  art. 
Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  ch.  v.  g  1.)  says  of 
Antiochus,  that  "  ho  camo  with  great 
forces  to  Pelusium,  and  circumvented  Ptol- 
emy Philometor  hi/  treacheri/,  and  seized 
upon  Egypt."  The  fact  stated  by  Diodo- 
rus and  Josephus,  that  he  took  possession 
of  Memphis  and  of  all  Egypt  as  far  as 
Alexandria,  fully  illustrates  what  is  said 
here,  that  he  would  '  enter  in  the  fattest 
places  of  the  province.'  These  were  the 
most  choice  and  fertile  portions  of  Egypt. 
%  And  he  shall  do  that  which  his  fathers 
have  not  done,  nor  his  father's  fathers. 
AVhich  none  of  his  predecessors  have  been 
able  to  do;  to  wit,  in  the  conquest  of 
Egj'pt.  No  one  of  them  had  it  so  com- 
pletely in  his  possession  ;  no  one  obtained 
from  it  so  much  spoil.  There  can  be  uo 
doubt  that  such  was  the  fact.  The  wars 
of  his  predecessors  with  the  Eg3'ptians 
had  been  mostly  waged  in  Coelesyria  and 
Palestine,  for  the  possession  of  these 
provinces.  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  how- 
ever, at  first  took  Pelusium,  the  key  of 
Egypt,  and  then  invaded  Egypt  itself, 
seized  upon  its  strongest  places,  and  made 
the  king  a  captive.  Jahn,  Heb.  Common- 
wealth, p.  263.  Comp.  1  Mac.  i.  10. 
*l  He  shall  scatter  amonr/  them  the  prey, 
&c.  Among  his  followers.  lie  shall  re- 
ward them  with  the  spoils  of  Egypt. 
Comp.  1  Mac.  i.  19  :  "  Thus  they  got  the 
strong  cities  in  the  land  of  Egj'pt,  and  he 
took  the  spoils  thereof."  'i^  And  he  shall 
forecast  his  devices.  Marg.,  'think  his 
thoughts.'  The  margin  is  in  accordance 
with  the  Hebrew.  The  meaning  is,  that 
he  would  form  plans,  or  that  this  would 
bo   his  aim.     He  would  direct  the  war 


his  devices  against  the  strongholds, 
even  for  a  time. 

25  And  ho  shall  stir  up  his  power 
and  his  courage  against  the  king  of 
the  south  with  a  great  army ;   and 


against  the  strongly  fortified  places  of 
I  Egypt.  ^  Against  the  strongholds.  An- 
tiochus took  possession  of  Pelusium,  the 
key  of  Egypt;  he  seized  upon  Memphis, 
and  he  then  laid  siege  to  Alexandria, 
supposing  that  if  that  were  reduced  the 
whole  country  would  be  his.  Jos.  Ant. 
B.  xii.  ch.  v.  §  2.  ^  Even  for  a  time. 
Josephus  (!(( sup.)  says  that  ho  was  drive* 
from  Alexandria,  and  out  of  all  Egj-pt, 
by  the  threatenings  of  the  Romans,  com- 
manding him  to  let  that  country  alone. 
There  were  other  reasons,  also,  which  com- 
bined with  this,  inducing  him  to  retire 
from  that  countrj-.  He  was  great)}'  en- 
raged by  the  effect  which  a  report  of  his 
death  in  Judca  had  produced  there.  It 
was  said  that  all  the  Jews  rejoiced  at  that 
report,  and  rose  in  rebellion ;  and  he 
therefore  resolved  to  inflict  revenge  on 
I  them,  and  left  Egypt,  and  went  to  Jeru- 
salem, and  subdued  it  either  by  storm  or 
by  stratagem. 

25.  And  he  shall  stir  vp  his  poicer  and 
[  his  courage  against  the  king  of  the  south 
with  a  great  army.  This  must  refer  to  a 
j  subsequent  invasion  of  Egypt  by  Antio- 
1  chus.  In  the  course  of  his  reign  he  four 
times  invaded  that  country  with  various 
degrees  of  success.  In  the  first,  he  took 
Pelusium,  and  having  placed  a  garrison 
there,  retired  into  winter  quarters  to 
Tyre.  In  the  second,  above  referred 
to,  he  took  Memphis  and  laid  siege 
to  Alexandria.  The  third  invasion  here 
referred  to  was  after  he  had  taken  Jeru- 
salem, and  was  caused  by  the  fact  that, 
as  Ptolemy  Philometor  was  in  the  hands 
of  Antiochus,  the  Egyptians  had  raised 
Ptolemy  Phj'scon  {the  Gross)  to  the  throne. 
This  prince  assumed  the  name  of  Euer- 
getes  II.  The  pretended  object  of  Antio- 
chus m  this  invasion  (B.  C.  16S)  was  to 
support  the  claims  of  Ptolemy  Philometor 
against  the  usurpation  of  his  brother,  but 
his  real  purpose  was  to  subject  the  whole 
country  to  his  own  power.  He  defeated 
the  Alexandrians  by  sea  near  Pelusium, 
and  then  drew  up  his  land  forces  before 
the  city  of  Alexandria.  Ptolemy  Pbys- 
con  sent  an  embassy  to  Homo  to  .solicit 


454 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534 


the  king  of  the  south  shall  be  stirred  |  portion   of  his  meat  shall  destroy 
up  to  battle -with  a  very  great  and  him,  and  his  army  shall  overflow: 
mighty   army ;    but    he   shall    not 
stand:    for  they   shall  forecast  de- 
vices against  him. 

26  Yea,   they   that  feed  of   the 


the  protection  of  the  Senate,  and  at  the 
same  time  entered  into  negotiations  of 
peace  with  Antiochus.  The  proposals 
were  rejected,  but  when  he  perceived 
that  the  conquest  of  Alexandria  would 
be  difficult,  he  retired  to  Memphis,  and 
pretended  to  deliver  up  the  kingdom  to 
Ptolemy  Physcon,  and  having  left  a 
strong  garrison  at  Pelusium,  he  returned 
to  Antioch.  This  invasion  is  thus  de- 
scribed by  the  author  of  the  Book  of 
Maccabees  (1  Mac.  i.  17.):  "Wherefore 
he  entered  Egypt  with  a  great  multitude, 
with  chariots,  and  elephants,  and  horse- 
men, and  a  great  navy."  Porphyry,  as 
quoted  by  Scaliger;  Polybius,  Lcgat.  §  81, 
82,  84;  Levy  xliv.  19,  xlv.  ii;  Justin 
xxxiv.  2 ;  Prideaux,  Con.  III.  232—235. 
^  And  the  king  of  the  south.  Ptolemy 
Physcon,  king  of  Egypt.  ^  Shall  be 
stirred  up  to  battle  with  a  very  great  and 
viif/hty  army.  To  oppose  Antiochus. 
^  But  he  shall  not  stand.  Ho  shall  not 
be  able  to  resist  him.  His  navy  was  de- 
feated ;  Antiochus  still  held  possession 
of  Memphis,  and  laid  siege  to  Alexandria. 
^  For  they  shall  forecast  devices  against 
him.  Heb.,  'shall  think  his  thoughts' 
(See  Notes  on  ver.  24) ;  that  is,  they  shall 
form  plans  against  him  to  defeat  him. 
The  reference  here  is  to  the  in  vading  forces, 
that  they  would  form  sagacious  plans  for 
the   overthrow  of  the  king  of  Egypt. 

26.  Yea,  they  that  feed  of  the  portion 
of  his  meat  shall  destroy  him.  They  of 
his  own  family  ;  they  who  are  nourished 
at  his  table  ;  they  who  are  his  cabinet 
counsellors,  and  professed  and  confiden- 
tial friends.  The  meaning  is,  that  they 
would  prove  treacherous  and  unfaithful. 
This  is  by  no  means- improbable.  Anti- 
ochus was  powerful,  and  had  seized  upon 
Pelusium,  and  upon  Memphis,  and  upon 
the  fairest  portions  of  Egypt.  He  was 
also  in  possession  of  the  person  of  the 
lawful  king,  and  had  a  fair  {.respect  of 
subduing  tbft  whole  country.  In  these 
circumstances,  nothing  would  be  more 
natural  than  the  very  inmates  of  the 
palace — the  persons  around  the  reigning 
king — should  begin  to  doubt  whether  be 


and  many  shall  fall  down  slain. 

27  And  both  these  kings'  *  hearts 
shall   he  to  do   mischief,  and  they 

*  their  hearts. 


could  hold  out,  and  should  be  disposed 
to  make  terms  with  the  invader.  %  And 
his  army  shall  overfloic.  The  connection 
here  requires  us  to  understand  this  of  the 
army  of  the  king  of  Egypt.  The  mean- 
ing seems  to  be,  that  his  forces  would  be 
great,  and  would  spread  themselves  out 
like  overflowing  waters,  but  that  notwith- 
standing this  many  of  them  would  be 
slain.  ^  And  many  shall  fall  doirn  slain. 
In  battle.  Notwithstanding  the  army 
would  be  numerous,  and  would,  as  it 
were,  spread  over  the  land,  still  it  would 
not  be  sufficient  to  keep  out  the  invaders, 
but  many  of  them  would  fall  in  the  field. 
The  account  in  1  Mac.  i.  18,  is,  that 
"  Ptolemy  was  afraid  of  him  [Antiochus], 
and  fled ;  and  many  loere  wounded  to 
death." 

27.  And  both  these  kings'  hearts  shall 
be  to  do  mischief.  Marg.,  their  hearts. 
The  meaning  is,  that  their  hearts  were 
set  on  some  evil  or  unjust  purpose.  The 
reference  here  is,  evidently,  to  Antiochus 
and  Ptolemy  Philometor,  and  the  time 
alluded  to  is  when  Ptolemy  was  in  the 
possession  of  Antiochus,  and  when  they 
were  together  forming  their  plans.  An- 
tiochus invaded  the  country  under  pre- 
tence of  aiding  Ptolemy  and  establishing 
him  in  the  government,  and  for  the  same 
reason,  under  pretence  of  protecting  him, 
he  had  him  now  in  his  possession.  At 
first,  also,  it  would  seem  that  Ptolemy 
coincided  with  his  plans,  or  was  so  far 
deceived  by  the  acts  of  Antiochus  as  to 
believe  in  his  friendship,  and  to  unite 
with  him  in  his  schemes,  for  it  is  ex- 
pressly said  by  the  historians,  as  quoted 
above,  that  when  Antiochus  left  Egypt, 
leaving  Ptolemy  at  Memphis,  and  a 
strong  garrison  in  Pelusium,  Ptolemy 
began  to  see  through  his  crafty  designs, 
and  to  act  accordingly.  Until  that  time, 
however,  he  seems  to  have  regarded  the 
professions  of  Antiochus  as  sincere,  and 
to  have  entered  fully  into  his  plans. 
To  that  fact  there  is  allusion  here,  and 
the  meaning  is,  that  they  were  forming 
united  schemes  of  evil — of  conquest,  and 
robbery,  and   oppression.     The   guiding 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER  XI, 


455 


shall  speak  lies  at  one  table  ;  but  it 
shall  not  prosper  :  for  a  yet  the  end 
shall  he  at  the  time  appointed. 

=  c.  8. 19.  Ter.  29, 35,  40. 

spirit  in  this  was,  undoubtedly,  Anti- 
oohus,  but  Ptolemy  seems  to  have  con- 
curred in  it.  *\  And  they  shall  speak  lies 
at  one  table.  At  the  same  table.  Pto- 
lemy was  a  captive,  and  was  entirely 
in  the  possession  of  Antiochus,  but 
it  was  a  matter  of  policy  with  the  latter 
to  hide  from  him,  as  far  as  possible,  the 
fact  that  he  was  a  prisoner,  and  to  treat 
him  as  a  king.  It  is  to  be  presumed, 
therefore,  that  he  would  do  so,  and  that 
they  would  be  seated  at  the  same  table  ; 
that  is,  that  Ptolemy  would  be  treated 
outwardly  with  the  respect  due  to  a  king. 
In  this  familiar  condition — in  this  state 
of  apparently  respectful  and  confidential 
intercourse— they  would  form  their  plans. 
Yet  the  devices  of  both  would  bo  false — 
or  would  be,  in  fact,  speaking  lies.  An- 
tiochus would  be  acting  perfidiously 
throughout,  endeavouring  to  impose  on 
Ptolemy,  and  making  promises,  and  giv- 
ing assurances,  which  he  knew  to  be 
false;  and  Ptolemy  would  be  equally 
acting  a  deceitful  part — entering  into  en- 
gagements which,  perhaps,  he  did  not 
intend  to  keep,  and  which  would,  at  any 
rate,  be  soon  violated.  It  is  impossible 
now  to  know  how  he  came  into  the  hands 
of  Antiochus — whether  he  surrendered 
himself  in  war;  or  whether  he  was  per- 
suaded to  do  it  by  the  acts  of  his  cour- 
tiers ;  or  whether  he  was  really  deceived 
by  Antiochus  and  supposed  that  he  was 
his  friend,  and  that  his  protection  was 
necessary.  On  any  of  these  suppositions 
it  cannot  be  supposed  that  ho  would  be 
very  likely  to  be  sincere  in  his  transac- 
tions with  Antiochus.  ^  But  it  shall  not 
prosper.  Tho  scheme  concocted,  what- 
ever it  was,  would  not  be  successful. 
The  plan  of  Antiochus  was  to  obtain 
possession  of  the  whole  of  Egypt,  but  in 
this  he  failed;  and  so  far  as  Ptolemy  en- 
tered into  the  scheme  proposed  by  Anti- 
ochus, on  pretence  for  the  good  of  his 
country,  it  also  failed.  Whatever  the 
purpose  was,  it  was  soon  broken  up  by 
the  fact  that  Antiochus  left  Egypt,  and 
made  war  in  Jerusalem.  ^  For  yet  the  end 
shall  be  at  the  time  appointed.  See  ver. 
29.     The  end — tho  result — shall  not  be 


28  Then  shall  he  return  into  his 
land  with  great  riches ;  and  hia 
heart  shall  be  against  the  holy  cove- 


now,  and  in  the  manner  contemplated  by 
these  two  kings.  It  shall  be  at  the  time 
'appointed,'  to  wit,  by  God,  and  in  an- 
other manner.  The  whole  case  shall 
issue  difi'erently  from  what  they  design, 
and  at  the  time  which  an  overrulinc  Pro- 
vidence has  designated.  The  reasZn  im- 
plied here  why  they  could  not  carry  out 
their  design  was,  that  there  was  an  'ap- 
pointed time'  when  these  aflfairs  were  to 
be  determined,  and  that  no  purposes  of 
theirs  could  bo  allowed  to  frustrate  tho 
higher  counsels  of  the  Most  High. 

28.  Then  shall  he  return  into  his  land 
tcith  great  riches.  Enriched  with  tho 
spoils  of  Egypt.  Having  taken  Mem- 
phis, and  the  fairest  portions  of  Egypt, 
he  would,  of  course,  carry  great  wealth 
to  his  own  country  on  his  return.  Thus 
it  is  said  in  1  Mac.  i.  19 :  "  Thus  they 
got  the  strong  cities  in  the  land  of  Egypt, 
and  he  took  the  spoils  thereof."  The 
meaning  here  is,  that  he  would  set  out  to 
return  to  his  own  land.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  on  his  way  he  would  pause  to  bring 
desolation  in  Jerusalem,  as  is  intimated 
in  fehe  subsequent  part  of  the  verse. 
^  And  his  heart  shall  be  against  the  holy 
covenant.  The  words  '  holy  covenant' 
are  a  technical  expression  to  denote  the 
Jewish  institutions.  The  Hebrew  people 
were  called  the  'covenant  people,'  as 
being  a  people  with  whom  God  had  en- 
tered into  covenant.  All  their  privileges 
were  regarded  as  the  result  of  that  cove- 
nant, and  hence  the  word  came  to  be  ap- 
plied to  all  the  institutions  of  the  nation. 
When  it  is  said  that  his  heart  was  against 
that  covenant,  tho  meaning  is,  that  he 
was  enraged  against  it;  and  determineU 
to  bring  calamity  upon  the  place  and 
people  connected  with  it.  The  reason 
of  this  was  the  following.  When  he  was 
in  Egypt,  a  report  was  spread  abroad  that 
he  was  dead.  In  consequence  of  this 
rumour,  Jason  took  the  opportunity  of 
recovering  the  office  of  high  priest,  from 
his  brother  Menelaus,  and  with  a  thou- 
sand men  took  Jerusalem,  drove  Mene- 
laus into  the  castle,  and  slew  many  whom 
he  took  for  his  enemies.  Antiochus, 
hearing  of  this,  supposed  that  all  the 


456 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534. 


nant ;  and  he  shall  do  exploits,  and '  south  ;  but  it  shall  not  he   as  tho 
return  to  his  own  land.  former,  or  as  the  latter. 


29  At  the  time  appointed  he 
shall  return,  and  come  toward  the 

Jews  had  revolted,  and  determined  to 
inflict  summary  chastisement  on  them  on 
his  way  to  his  own  land.  See  Jahn, 
Heb.  Commonwealth,  p.  263.  ^f  And  he 
shall  do  exploits,  and  return  to  his  own 
land.  The  word  exploits  is  supplied  by 
the  translators.  The  Hebrew  is,  simply, 
'he  shall  do;'  that  is,  he  shall  accom- 
plish the  purpose  of  his  heart  on  the  covo- 
nant  people.  In  this  expedition,  he  took 
Jerusalem,  whether  by  storm  or  by  stra- 
tagem, is  not  quite  certain.  Diodorus 
Siculus,  and  the  author  of  the  second  book 
of  Maccabees,  and  Josephus,  (Jewish 
"Wars,  i.  1,  2,  and  vi.  10,  1,)  say  that  it 
was  by  storm.  The  account  which  he 
gives  in  his  Antiquities  (B.  xii.  ch.  v.  ^3) 
is,  that  ho  took  it  by  stratagem,  but  the 
statement  in  the  Jewish  War  is  much 
more  probable,  for  Antiochus  plundered 
the  city,  slew  eighty  thousand  persons, 
men,  women,  and  children,  took  forty 
thousand  prisoners,  and  sold  as  many 
into  slavery,  2  Mac.  v.  5,  6,  11 — 14.  As 
if  this  were  not  enough,  under  the  guid- 
ance of  the  high  priest  Menelaus,  he 
went  into  the  sanctuary,  uttering  blas- 
phemous language,  took  away  all  the 
gold  and  silver  vessels  he  could  find  there, 
the  golden  table,  altar  and  candlestick, 
and  all  the  great  vessels,  and  that  he 
might  leave  nothing  behind,  searched 
the  subterranean  vaults,  and  in  this  man- 
ner collected  eighteen  hundred  talents 
of  gold.  He  then  sacrificed  a  swine  on 
the  altar,  boiled  a  piece  of  the  flesh,  and 
sprinkled  the  whole  temple  with  the 
broth,  2  Mac.  v.  15—21;  1  Mac.  i.  21— 
28.  Diodorus  Sic.  xxxiv.  1 ;  Jahn,  Heb. 
Commonwealth,  p.  264. 

29.  At  the  time  apjioinfed.  In  the  pur- 
poses of  God.  See  Notes  on  ver.  27. 
That  is,  at  the  time  when  God  shall  de- 
sign to  accomplish  his  own  purposes  in 
regard  to  him.  The  idea  is,  that  there 
was  a  definite  period  in  the  divine  mind 
in  which  all  this  was  to  be  done,  and 
that  when  this  should  occur  Antiochus 
would  return  again  to  invade  Egypt.  ^He 
shall  return  and  come  toward  the  south. 
With  an  intention  of  invading  Egypt. 
The  occasion   of  this  invasion  was,  that 


30  T[For  the  ships  » of  Chittim 

»  Nu.  24. 24. 

after  the  departure  of  Antiochus,  leaving 
Ptolemy  in  possession  of  Egypt,  or  hav- 
ing professedly  given  up  the  kingdom  to 
him,  Ptolemy  suspected  the  designs  of 
Antiochus,  and  came  to  an  agreement 
with  his  brother  Physcon,  that  they 
should  share  the  government  between 
them,  and  resist  Antiochus  with  their 
united  power.  To  do  this,  they  hired 
mercenary  troops  from  Greece.  Anti- 
ochus, learning  this,  openly  threw  off  the 
mask,  and  prepared  to  invade  Egypt 
again,  B.  C.  167.  He  sent  his  fleet  to 
Cyprus  to  secure  possession  of  that  island, 
and  led  his  army  towards  Egypt  to  sub- 
due the  two  brothers,  designing  to  annex 
the  whole  country  to  his  dominions. 
^  But  it  shall  not  be  as  the  former,  or  as 
the  latter.  At  the  first  invasion  or  the 
second.  In  these  he  was  successful ;  in 
this  he  would  not  be.  The  reason  of  his 
want  of  success  is  stated  in  the  following 
verse — that  by  the  aid  which  the  two 
brothers  had  obtained  from  abroad,  as 
expressed  in  the  next  verse,  they  would 
be  able  to  oppose  him. 

30.  For  the  ships  of  Chittim  shall  come 
against  him.  The  word  rendered  Chit- 
tim—  c^■^3 — according  to  Gesenius,  prop- 
erly means  Cypricius,  so  called  from  a 
celebrated  Phoenician  colony  in  the  island 
of  Cyprus.  In  a  wider  acceptation  the 
name  came  to  comprehend  the  islands 
and  coasts  of  the  Mediterranean  sea,  es- 
pecially the  northern  parts,  and  there- 
fore stands  for  the  islands  and  coasts  of 
Greece  and  the  ^gean  Sea.  See  Gese- 
nius, Lex.,  and  comp.  Josephus  Ant.  B.  I. 
ch.  vi.  1.  The  Egyptian  government  had 
called  in  the  aid  of  the  Romans,  and  An- 
tiochus, therefore,  was  threatened  with  a 
war  with  the  Romans  if  he  did  not  aban- 
don his  enterprise  against  Egypt.  The 
reference  in  the  passage  before  us,  is  to 
the  embassage  which  the  Romans  sent  to 
Antiochus  in  Egypt,  requiring  him  to  de- 
sist from  his  enterprise  against  Egypt. 
"When  he  had  arrived  at  Leusine,  about 
four  miles  from  Alexandria,  he  met  Caius 
Popilius  Lfenas,  Caius  Decimius,  and  Ca- 
ius Hostilius,  ambassadors  whom  the  Ro- 
man Senate  had  sent  to  him  at  the  ear- 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER  XI. 


457 


shall  come  a2;riinst  him  :  therefore  ]  even  return,  and  have  intelligence 
ho  shall  be  grieved,  and  return,  and  with  them  that  forsake  the  holy 
have  indignation  against  the  holy  covenant, 
covenant :  so  shall  he  >  do  ;  he  shall       31  And  arms  shall  stand  on  his 

»  Fuimiea,  IGS,  1C9. 

nest  request  of  Ptolemy  Physcon.  They 
were  instructed  to  assure  Antiochus  that 
he  must  leave  the  kingdom  of  Egypt  and 
the  island  of  Cyprus  in  peace,  or  expect 
a  w.'er  with  the  Komans.  When  Antiochus 
said  that  he  would  lay  the  aflairs  before 
his  council,  Popetius,  the  head  of  the  le- 
gation, with  his  stalf  drew  a  circle  about 
the  king  in  the  sand  on  which  they  stood, 
and  exclaimed,  'Before  you  leave  that 
circle,  you  must  give  mo  an  answer  which 
I  can  report  to  the  Senate.'  Antiochus 
was  confjundcd,  but  on  a  little  reflection, 
he  said  he  would  do  whatever  the  Senate 
required."  Jahn,  Ileb.  Commonwealth, 
pp.  265,  2G6 ;  Pulyb.  Legat.  g  90,  92 ; 
Livy  xliv.  14,  29;  41— 16;  xlv.  10,12. 
These  ambassadors  camo  by  the  way  of 
Greece,  and  in  Grecian  vessels,  and  their 
coming  might  properly  be  described  as 
'ships  from  Chittim.'  They  went  from 
Rome  to  Brundusiura,  and  then  passed 
over  to  the  Grecian  shore,  and  from  thence 
by  the  way  of  Chalcis,  Delos  and  Rhodes, 
to  Alexandria.  Prideaux,  III.  237. 
^  Thercfvre  he  sJiall  be  grieved.  The 
word  here  used — nN:3 — means  properly 
to  become  faint-hearted ;  to  be  frightened  ; 
to  be  dejected,  sad,  humbled.  Job  xxx. 
8;  Ezek.  xiii.  22;  Ps.cix.  16.  The  mean- 
ing here  is,  that  he  became  dispirited, 
dejected,  cast-down,  and  abandoned  his 
purpose.  lie  saw  that  it  would  be  vain 
to  .ittempt  to  contend  with  the  Romans, 
and  he  was  constrained  reluctantly  to  re- 
linquish his  enterprise.  ^  And  return. 
Set  out  to  return  to  his  own  land.  ^  And 
have  {udiynation  against  the  liolij  covenant. 
Notes  on  ver.  28.  That  is,  he  would  be 
filled  with  wrath  against  Jerusalem  and 
the  Jews.  Polybius  saj-s  that  he  left 
Egj'pt  in  great  anger,  because  he  was 
compelled  by  the  Romans  to  abandon  his 
designs.  In  this  condition  ho  was,  of 
course,  in  a  state  of  mind  to  become  irri- 
tated against  any  other  people,  and,  if 
an  occasion  should  bo  given,  would  seek 
ro  vent  his  wrath  in  some  other  direction. 
This  habitual  state  of  feeling  towards  Je- 
rusalem and  the  Jews  would  make  him 
ready  to  seize  upon  the  slightest  pretext 
3tf 


to  wreak  his  vengeance  on  the  holy  land. 
What  was  the  immediate  occasion  of  his 
taking  this  opportunity  to  attack  Jerusa- 
lem is  not  certainly  known,  but  in  his 
marching  back  through  Palestine,  he  de- 
tached from  his  army  twenty-two  thou- 
sand men,  under  the  command  of  Apol- 
lonius,  and  sent  them  to  Jerusalem  to 
destroy  it.  Prideaux,  III.  239;  Jahn, 
Ileb.  Commonwealth,  p.  266.  ApoUo- 
nius  arrived  before  Jerusalem  B.  C.  167, 
just  two  years  after  the  city  had  been 
taken  by  Antiochus  himself.  ^  So  shall 
he  do.  That  is,  in  the  manner  described 
in  this  and  tlie  following  verses.  ^  He 
shall  even  return.  On  his  way  to  his  own 
land.  ^  And  have  intelligence  with  them 
that  forsake  the  holy  covenant.  Have  an 
understanding  with  them;  that  is,  with  a 
portion  of  the  nation — with  those  who 
were  disposed  to  cast  off  the  religion  of 
their  fathers.  There  was  a  considerable 
part  of  the  nation  that  was  inclined  to  do 
this,  and  to  introduce  the  customs  of  the 
Greeks  (Comp.  Jahn,  Ileb.  Common- 
wealth, pp.  258 — 260);  and  it  was  natural 
that  Antiochus  should  seek  to  have  an 
understanding  with  them,  and  to  make 
use  of  them  in  accomplishing  his  designs. 
It  was  very  probably  at  the  solicitation 
of  this  infidel  and  disaffected  party  of  the 
Hebrew  people  that  Antiochus  had  inter- 
fered in  their  affairs  at  all.  Comp.  1  Mac.  i. 
11—15. 

31.  And  arms  shall  stand  on  his  part. 
Up  to  this  verse  there  is  a  general  agree- 
ment among  commentators,  that  the  ref- 
erence is  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  From 
this  verse,  however,  to  the  end  of  the 
chapter,  there  is  no  little  diversity  of 
opinion.  One  portion  suppose  that  the 
description  of  Antiochus  and  his  deeds 
continues  still  to  be  the  design  of  the 
prophet;  another  that  tho  Romans  are 
hero  introduced,  and  that  a  part  of  the 
predictions  in  the  remainder  of  this  chap- 
ter are  yet  to  be  fulfilled  ;  another,  as  Je- 
rome, and  most  of  the  Christian  fathers, 
suppose  that  the  reference  is  to  Antiochus 
as  the  type  of  Antichrist,  and  that  the 
description  passes  from   the  type  to  the 


458 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534 


part,  and  they  shall  pollute  the  sane- ]  shall   place  the    abomination  that 
tuary  of  strength,   and   shall   take ,  ^maketh  desolate. 
away  the  daily  aacrijice,  and  they  =.ot,  astonisJiei?i. 


antitype.  In  this  last  class  are  found 
Bishop  Newton,  Gill,  Calvin,  Prideaux, 
Wintle,  Elliott  (Apocalypse,  iv.  1Z7,  seq.) 
and  others;  in  the  former,  Grotius,  Len- 
gerke,  Bertholdt,  Maiirer,  &c.  In  this 
same  class  is  found  the  name  of  Porphyry 
— who  maintained  that  the  whole  referred 
to  Antiochus,  and  that  the  allusion  was 
so  clear  as  to  prove  that  this  portion  of 
the  book  was  written  after  the  events  had 
occurred.  The  reason  suggested  for  the 
change  in  the  supposed  reference,  as  al- 
leged by  Bishop  Newton  on  the  Prophe- 
cies, p.  296,  is,  substantially,  that  what 
follows  can  be  applied  only  in  part  to  An- 
tiochus. Whether  this  portion  of  the 
chapter  can  be  shown  to  refer  to  him,  we 
shall  be  able  to  determine  as  we  proceed. 
Nothing  can  be  clearer  than  the  allusion 
up  to  this  point.  The  word  rendered 
arms,  in  the  verse  before  us — 0>''ij  — sing. 
p-^1  — means  properly  the  arm — especially 
the  lower  arm  below  the  elbow ;  and  then 
comes  to  denote  strength,  might,  power; 
and  thence  is  applied  to  a  military  force, 
or  an  armj'.  See  ver.  15.  Such  is  un- 
doubtedly the  meaning  here,  and  the 
reference  is  to  the  military  force  which 
Antiochus  would  employ  to  wreak  his 
vengeance  on  the  Jews — particularly  by 
the  instrumentality  of  Apollonius.  Oth- 
ers would  apply  this  to  the  Kouians,  and 
suppose  that  they  are  introduced  here, 
but  this  construction  is  forced  and  unnat- 
ural, for  (a)  the  reference  in  the  previous 
verses  was,  undoubtedly,  to  Antiochus, 
and  the  narrative  seems  to  proceed  as  if 
there  were  no  change;  (6)  there  is  nothing 
in  the  statement  which  does  not  agree 
with  what  was  done  by  Antiochus.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  as  attested  by  all  history, 
he  detached  Apollonius  with  twenty-two 
thousand  men,  on  his  mortified  return  to 
his  own  land,  to  attack  and  lay  waste 
Jerusalem,  and  Apollonius  did  all  that  is 
here  said  would  bo  done.  Bishop  New- 
ton concedes  (p.  2'J-i),  that  "  this  interpre- 
tation might  be  admitted,  if  the  other 
parts  were  equally  applicable  to  An- 
tioclius;  but,"  says  he,  "the  difficulty, 
or  rather  impossibility  of  applying  them 
to  Antiochus,  or  any  of  the  Syrian 
tings,    his    successors,    obliges     us    to 


look  out  for  another  interpretation." 
Accordingly,  bo  says,  that  Jerome  and 
the  Christians  of  his  time  contend  that 
these  things  apply  to  Antichrist;  and  ho 
himself  adopts  the  view  proposed  by  Sir 
Isaac  Newton,  that  it  refers  to  the  Ro- 
mans, and  that  the  allusion  is  to  the  fact 
that  at  the  very  time  when  Antiochus  re- 
treated out  of  Egypt,  the  Romans  con- 
quered Macedonia,  "  putting  an  end  to 
the  reign  of  Daniel's  third  beast,"  and 
that  the  prophet  here  leaves  ofl"  the  de- 
scription of  the  actions  of  the  Greeks,  and 
commences  a  description  of  the  Romans 
in  Greece.  As,  however,  all  that  is  here 
said  is  strictly  applicable  to  what  was 
done  by  Antiochus,  such  an  interpreta- 
tion is  unnecessary.  '■^  And  they  nholi 
pollute  the  sanctuari/  of  strength.  The 
'sanctuary  of  strength,'  seems  to  refer  to 
the  fortifications  or  defences  that  had 
been  set  up  to  protect  Jerusalem,  or  tho 
temple.  At  various  points  the  temple 
was  defended  in  this  manner,  not  only  by 
the  walls  of  the  city,  but  by  fortifications 
erected  within,  and  so  as  to  prevent  an 
army  from  approaching  the  temple,  even 
if  they  should  penetrate  the  outer  wall. 
Comp.  1  Mae.  i.  36.  The  temple  itself 
might  thus  be  regarded  as  fortified,  or  as 
a  place  of  strength— and,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  when  Titus  ultimately  destroyed  the 
cit}',  the  chief  difliculty  was  to  obtain 
possession  of  the  temple — a  place  that 
held  out  to  the  last.  When  it  is  said  that 
they  would  '  j^ollute  the  sanctuary  of 
strength,'  the  reference  is  to  what  was 
done  b}'  Apollonius,  at  the  command  of 
Antiochus,  to  profane  the  temple,  and  to 
put  an  end  to  the  sacrifices  and  worship 
there.  Comp.  1  Mae.  i.  29,  37—49  ;  Jos. 
Ant.  B.  xii.  ch.  v.  g  4.  The  account  in 
the  book  of  Maccabees  is  as  follows: 
"  Thus  the}'  shed  innocent  blood  on  every 
side  of  the  sanctuary  and  defiled  it,  inso- 
much that  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem, 
fled  because  of  them,  wherefore  the  city 
was  made  a  habitation  of  strangers,  and 
became  strange  to  those  who  were  born 
in  her,  and  ber  own  children  left  her. 
Her  sanctuary  was  laid  waste  like  a  wil- 
derness, and  her  feasts  were  turned  int« 
mourning,  her  sabbaths  into  repioacn, 
her  honour  into  cwntcmpt.     As  had  been 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER   XI. 


45a 


32    And    such    as    do    ^vickedly 
against  the  covenant  shall  be  ^cor- 

her  glory,  so  was  her  dishonour  increasedj 
and  her  excellency  was  turned  into  mourn- 
ing. Moreover,  king  Antiochus  wrote  to 
his  whole  kingdom  that  all  should  be  one 
people,  and  every  one  should  learn  his 
laws;  so  all  the  heathen  agreed  accord- 
ing to  the  commandment  of  the  king. 
Yea  many  Israelites  consented  to  his  re- 
ligion, and  sacrificed  unto  idol?,  and  jiro- 
faned  the  sabbath.  For  the  king  had 
sent  letters  by  messengers  unto  Jerusa- 
lem and  the  cities  of  Judah,  that  they 
should  follow  the  strange  laws  of  the  land, 
and  forbid  burnt-offerings,  and  sacrifices, 
and  drink-offerings,  in  the  temple;  and 
that  they  should  profane  the  sabbaths  and 
festival  days,  and  pollute  the  sanctuary 
and  holy  people ;  set  np  altars,  and 
groves,  and  chapels  of  idols,  and  sacrifice 
swine's  flesli,  and  unclean  beasts;  that 
they  should  also  leave  their  children  uncir- 
cumeised,  and  make  their  souls  abomina- 
ble with  all  manner  of  uncleanness  and 
profanation,  to  the  end  they  might  forget 
the  law,  and  change  all  the  ordinances." 
^  And  shall  take  awai/  the  daili/  sacrifices. 
That  is,  shall  forbid  them,  and  so  pollute 
the  temple  and  the  altar,  as  to  prevent 
their  being  offered.  See  the  quotation 
above.  This  occurred  in  the  month  of 
June,  B.  C.  167.  See  Jahn,  Ueb.  Com- 
monwealth, p.  207.  ^  And  they  shall 
place  the  abomination  that  malceth  desolate. 
Marg.,  or  astonisheth.  The  Hebrew  word 
—  opti'D — will  bear  either  interpreta- 
tion, though  the  usage  of  the  word  is 
in  favour  of  the  translation  in  tlie  text. 
The  passage  will  also  admit  of  this  trans- 
lation, '  the  abomination  of  desolation  of 
him  who  makes  desolate,'  or  of  the  deso- 
later.  Sec  Gesenius,  Zea-.  3.  The  idea  is, 
that  somehow  the  thing  here  referred  to 
would  be  connected  with  the  desolation, 
or  the  laying  wnste  of  the  city  and  tem- 
ple, and  the  sense  is  not  materially  varied 
whether  we  regard  it  as  'the  abomina- 
tion that  makes  desolate,'  that  is,  that  in- 
dicates the  desolation,  or,  '  the  abomina- 
tion of  the  desolate)-,'  that  is,  of  him  who 
has  laid  the  city  and  temple  waste.  On 
the  meaning  of  the  phrase  'abomination 
of  desolation,'  see  Notes  on  ch.  ix.  27. 
The  reference  here  is,  undoubtedly,  to 
someiuing  that  Antiochus  set  up  in  the  [ 
temple,  that  was  an  indication  of  desola-  | 


rupt  by  flatteries:   but  the  people 

s  or,  cause  to  dissemble. 

tion,  or  the  result  of  his  having  laid  the 
temple  in  ruins.  The  very  expression 
occurs  in  1  Mac.  i.  54 :  "  Now,  the  fif- 
teenth day  of  the  month  C'isleu,  in  the 
hundred  and  forty-fifth  year,  they  set  up 
the  abomination  of  desolation  upon  the 
altar,  and  builded  idol-altars  throughout 
the  cities  of  Judah  on  every  side."  This 
would  seem,  from  ver.  69,  to  have  been 
an  idol-altar  erected  over  or  ujwn  the  altar 
of  burnt-offerings.  "They  did  sacrifice 
upon  the  idol-altar,  which  was  upon  the 
altar  of  God."  "  At  this  time  an  old  man 
by  the  name  of  Athenajus,  was  sent  to 
Jerusalem  to  instruct  tho  Jews  in  the 
Greek  religion,  and  compel  them  to  an 
observance  of  its  rites.  lie  dedicated  tho 
temple  to  Jupiter  Olympius,  and  on  tho 
altar  of  Jehovah  ho  placed  a  smaller 
altar,  to  be  used  in  sacrificing  to  the  hea- 
then god."  Jahn,  Ileb.  Commonwealth, 
pp.  267,  2G8.  The  reference  here  is,  pro- 
bably, to  this  altar,  as  being  in  itself,  and 
in  the  situation  where  it  was  located,  an 
'  abominable'  thing  in  the  eyes  of  tho  He- 
brews, and  as  being  placed  there  by  a 
desolater,  or  waster.  The  same  language 
which  is  here  used  is  applied  in  ch.  ix. 
27,  and  in  the  New  Testament,  with  great 
propriety  to  what  the  Komans  set  up  in 
the  temple  as  an  indication  of  its  conquest 
and  profanation  ;  but  that  fact  does  not 
make  it  certain  that  it  is  so  to  be  under- 
stood here,  for  it  is  as  applicable  to  what 
Antiochus  did,  as  it  is  to  what  was  done 
by  the  Romans.  Sec  Notes  on  ch.  ix.  27. 
32.  And  such  cts  do  wickedli/  against  the 
covenant.  That  is,  among  the  Jews.  They 
who  apostatized,  and  who  became  willing 
to  receive  the  religion  of  foreigners. — 
There  was  such  a  party  in  Jerusalem,  and 
it  was  numerous.  See  Jahn,  Ileb.  Com- 
monwealth, pp.  25S,  259.  Comp.  1  Mac. 
i.  52  :  *'  Then  many  of  the  people  were 
gathered  unto  them,  to  wit,  every  one 
that  forsook  for  the  law;  and  so  they 
committed  evils  in  the  land."  ^  Shall 
be  corrupt  bij  flatteries.  By  flattering 
promises  of  his  favour,  of  office,  of  na- 
tional prosperity,  Ac.  See  Notes  on  ver. 
21.  Tho  margin  is,  cause  to  dissemble. 
The  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word — i]5n — 
is  rather  to  profane,  to  pollute,  to  defile  ; 
and  the  idea  here  is,  that  he  would  cause 
them  to  become  defiled;  that  is,  that  he 


4G0 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534. 


that  do   know  their  God  shall  be  |  many :  yet  they  shall   fall  by  the 
strong,  and  do  exploits.  j  sword,  and  by  flame,  by  captivity, 

33  And    they     that     understand  and  by  spoil,  many  days. 


among    the   people    shall   instruct 

would  seduce  them  to  impiety  and  apostacy. 
IF  But  the  people  that  do  know  their  God. 
They  who  adhere  to  the  service  and  wor- 
ship of  the  true  God,  and  who  are  inca- 
pable of  being  seduced  to  apostacy  and 
sin.  The  reference  here  is,  undoubtedly, 
to  .ludas  Maccabeus  and  his  followers.— a 
full  account  of  whose  doings  is  to  be 
found  in  the  books  of  the  Maccabees.  See 
also  Prideaux,  Con.  III.  2i5,  seq.,  and 
Jahn,  Ileb.  Commonwealth,  p.  268,  seq. 
f  Shall  be  stroiuj.  Shall  evince  great  va- 
lour, and  shall  show  great  vigour  in  op- 
posing him.  %  And  do  exploit-s.  The 
word  '  exploits,'  as  in  ver.  28,  is  supplied 
by  the  translators,  but  not  improperly. 
The  meaning  is,  that  they  would  show 
great  prowess  and  perform  illustrious 
deeds  in  battle.  See  Prideaux,  Con.  III. 
pp.  262,  263. 

33.  And  they  that  understand  among 
the  people.  Among  the  Hebrew  people. 
The  allusion  is  to  those  who,  in  those 
times  of  so  general  corruption  and  apos- 
tacy, should  have  a  proper  understand- 
ing of  the  law  of  God  and  the  nature  of 
religion.  There  were  those  in  the  days 
of  Judas  Maccabeus,  and  it  is  reasonable 
to  suppose  that  they  would  endeavour  to 
inculcate  just  views  among  the  people. 
*[  Shall  instruct  many.  In  the  nature  of 
religion  ;  in  their  duty  to  their  countr.y, 
and  to  God.  See  Prideaux,  Con.  III. 
265.  «r  Yet  they  shall  fall  by  the  sicord. 
They  shall  not  be  immediately  nor  al- 
ways successful.  Their  final  triumph 
would  be  only  after  many  of  them  had 
fallen  in  battle,  or  been  made  captives. 
Mattathias,  the  father  of  Judas  Macca- 
beus, who  began  the  opposition  to  Anti- 
ocluis  (1  Mae.  ii.  1),  having  summoned 
to  his  standard  as  many  as  he  could  in- 
duce to  follow  him,  retired  for  securitj' 
to  the  mountains.  He  was  pursued,  and 
refusing  to  fight  on  the  Sabbath,  his  ene- 
mies came  upon  him,  and  slew  many  of 
his  followers.  1  Mac.  ii.  14 — 37.  The 
author  of  the  book  of  Maccabees  (1  Mac. 
ii.  38)  says  of  this:  "So  they  rose  up 
against  them  in  battle  on  the  Sabbath, 
and  they  slew  theui,  with  their  wives  and 
children,  and  their  cattle,  to  the  number 
»f  a  thousand  people."     ^  And  by  /lame. 


34  Nowwhen  they  shall  fall,  they 


By  fire.  That  is,  probably,  their  dwell- 
ings would  be  fired,  and  they  would  per- 
ish in  the  flames,  or  in  caves  where  they 
fled  for  shelter,  or  by  being  cast  into 
heated  caldrons  of  brass.  See  2  Mac. 
vi.  11  :  "And  others,  that  had  run  to- 
gether into  caves  near  by"  (when  Anti- 
oehus  endeavoured  to  enforce  on  them 
the  observance  of  heathen  laws  and  cus- 
toms) "  to  keep  the  Sabbath-day  secretly, 
being  discovered  to  Philip,  were  all  burnt 
together,  because  they  made  a  conscience 
to  keep  themselves  for  the  honour  of  the 
most  sacred  day."  2Mae.  vii.3 — 5:  "Then 
the  king  being  in  a  rage,  commanded 
pans  and  caldrons  to  be  made  hot,  which 
forthwith  being  heated,  he  commanded 
to  cut  off  the  tongue  of  him  that  spoke 
first,  and  to  cut  off  the  utmost  parts  of 
his  bod}',  the  rest  of  his  brethren  and  his 
mother  looking  on.  Now  when  he  was 
thus  maimed  in  all  his  members,  he  com- 
manded him,  being  yet  alive,  to  be  brought 
to  the  fire,  and  to  be  fried  in  the  pan,"  &c. 
f  By  captivity.  1  Mae.  i.  33  :  "  But  the 
women  and  children  took  they  captive." 
See  also  2  Mac.  v.  24.  •[  And  by  spioil. 
By  plunder,  to  wit,  of  the  temple  and 
city.  See  1  Mac.  i.  20—24.  «[MaDy 
days.  Heh.,  days.  The  time  is  not  spe- 
cified, but  the  idea  is  that  it  would  be 
for  a  considerable  period.  Josephus  saj-s 
it  was  three  years.  Ant.  B.  xii.  ch.  vii. 
^6,  7;  1  Mac.  i.  59;  iv.  54;  2  Mac.  x. 
i— 7. 

34.  Now  tchen  they  shall  fall,  they 
shall  he  holpen  with  a  little  help.  By 
small  accessions  to  their  forces.  The 
armies  of  the  Maccabees  were  never  very 
numerous,  but  the  idea  here  is,  that  when 
they  should  be  persecuted  there  would 
be  accessions  to  their  forces  so  that  they 
would  be  able  to  prosecute  the  war.  At 
first  the  numbers  were  very  few  who  took 
up  arms,  and  undertook  to  defend  tlie 
institutions  of  religion,  but  their  numbers 
increased  until  they  were  finally  victo- 
rious. Those  who  first  banded  together, 
when  the  calamities  came  upon  the  na- 
tion, were  IMattathias  and  his  few  fol- 
lowers, and  this  is  the  little  help  that  is 
here  referred  to.  See  1  Mac.  ii.  ^  Bui 
many  shall  cleave   to   them.     As  was  the 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER   XI. 


461 


shall  be  holpen  with  a  little  help :  ]  and  to  purge,  and  to  make  tliem 
but  many  shall  cleave  to  them  Avith  1  Avhite,  even  to  the  time  of  the  end : 
flatteries.  because  it   is   yet  for   a  time  <^ap- 

35  And  some  of  them  of  under-  pointed, 
standing  shall  fall,  to  "  try  ^  them, !      36  ^  And  the  king   shall  do  ac 
2  2Ch.o2. 31.  hor,  l/ij  them.  cllab.  2.3. 


case  under  Judas  Maccabeus,  when  the 
forces  were  so  far  increased  as  to  be  able 
to  contend  successfully  with  Antiochus. 
^  With  JJatteries.  Perhaps,  with  flatter- 
ing hopes  of  spoil  or  honour;  that  is, 
that  they  would  not  unite  sincerely  with 
the  defenders  of  the  true  religion,  but 
would  be  actuated  by  prospect  of  plunder 
or  reward.  For  the  meaning  of  the  word, 
see  Notes  on  ver.  21.  The  sense  here 
is  not  that  Judas  would  flatter  them,  or 
would  secure  their  co-operation  by  flat- 
teries, but  that  this  would  be  what  they 
would  propose  to  their  own  minds,  and 
what  would  influence  them.  Comp. 
1  Mac.  V.  55,  56,  57:  "Now  what  time  as 
Judas  and  Jonathan  were  in  the  land  of 
Galaad,  and  Simon  his  brother  in  Gali- 
lee before  Ptolemais,  Joseph  the  son  of 
Zacharias,  and  Azarias,  captains  of  the 
garrisons,  heard  of  the  violent  acts  and 
warlike  deeds  which  they  had  done. 
Wherefore  they  said.  Let  us  also  get  us 
a  name,  and  go  fight  against  the  heathen 
round  about  us."  Comp.  2  JIac.  xii.  40; 
xiii.  21.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
iQiiuy  might  join  them  from  these  mo- 
tives. Such  an  event  would  be  likely  to 
occur  any  where,  when  one  was  success- 
ful, and  where  there  was  a  prospect  of 
spoils  or  of  fame  in  uniting  with  a  victo- 
rious leader  of  an  army. 

35.  And  some  of  them  of  understand- 
ing shall  full.  Some  of  those  who  have 
a,  correct  understanding  of  religion,  and 
who  have  joined  the  army  from  pure 
motives.  The  idea  seems  to  be  that  on 
some  occasiim  they  would  meet  with  a 
temporary  defeat,  in  order  that  the  sin- 
cerity of  the  others  might  be  tested,  or 
that  it  might  be  seen  who  adhered  to 
the  cause  from  principle,  and  who  from 
selfish  purposes.  If  they  should  not  al- 
ways be  successful;  if  they  should  be 
temporarily  defeated  ;  if  some  of  the  most 
eminent  among  them  should  ftiU  among 
the  slain,  and  if  the  cause  should  at  any 
time  look  dark,  this  would  serve  to  try 
the  sincerity  of  the  remainder  of  the 
army,  and  would  be  likely  to  thin  it  off 
•f  those  who  had  joined  it  only  from 
39* 


!  mercenary     motives.      ^  To    try     them. 
\  Marg.,  '  or,  bii  them.'     So  the  Hebrew — 
an?'      The  meaning,  perhaps,  is,  that  it 
1  would  bo  ly  them,  as  it  were,  that  the 
army   would    be   tried.     As    they  would 
fall   in   battle,  and   as   the   cause  would 
seem  to  be  doubtful,  this  would  test  the 
I  fidelity  of  others.     The  word  try  here — 
j  f]'\'i — means  properly  to  melt,  to  smelt — as 
'  metals  ;  then  to  prove  any  one  ;  and  then 
i  to  purify.     *[  And  to  purge.     To  purify; 
'  to  test  the  army  and  to  make  it  pure. 
]^  And  to  make   ihcm.  white.     To  wit,  by 
thus  allowing  those  who  had  joined  the 
army  from  mercenary  motives  to  with- 
draw.   Comp.  2  Mac.  xii.  39—41.    ^  Even 
!  to  the  time  of  the  end.     The   end  of  the 
i  war,  or  the  conflict.     There  would  be  an 
end  of  these  persecutions  and  trials,  and 
this   process    had   reference   to   that,  or 
1  tended  to  bring  it  about.     The  act   of 
freeing   the   army  from   false   friends — • 
]  from  those  who  had  joined  it  from  me;-- 
'  cenary  motives,  would  have  a  tendency 
to  accomplish  the  result  in  the  best  way 
possible,  and   in    the  speediest   manner. 
^  Because  it  is  yet  for  a  time  appointed. 
See  Notes  on  ver.  27.     This  seems  to  bo 
designed  for  an  assurance  that  the  cala- 
mity would  come  to  an  end,  or  that  there 
was  a  limit  beyond  which  it  could  not 
pass.     Thus  it  would  be  an  encourage- 
ment to  those  who  were  engaged  in  the 
struggle,  for  they  would  see  that  success 
must  ultimately  crown  their  labours. 

36.  And  the  king  shall  do  according  to 
his  will.  Shall  be  absolute  and  supreme, 
and  shall  accomplish  his  purposes.  This 
refers,  it  seems  to  mo,  beyond  question, 
to  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  was  exactly 
fulfilled  in  him.  He  accomplished  his 
purposes  in  regard  to  the  city  and  tem- 
ple in  the  most  arbitrary  manner,  and  was, 
in  evcr3'  respect,  an  absolute  despot.  It 
sliould  be  said,  however,  here,  that  most 
Christian  interpreters  suppose  that  the  al- 
lusion here  to  Antiochus  ceases,  and  that 
henceforward  it  refers  to  Antichrist.  So 
Jerome,  Gill,  Bp.  Newton,  and  others ;  and 
80  Jorome  says  many  of  the  Jews  under- 


462 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  534 


cording  to  his  will;  and  »he  shall  j  the  indignation  be  accomplished, 
exalt  himself,  and  magnify  him-  for  that  that  is  determined  ''shall 
self    above    every   god,    and    shall  be  done. 

speak  marvellous  things  against  the  37  Neither  shall  ht  regard  the 
God  of  gods,  and  shall  prosper  till  » Is.  14  13, 14 ;  Re.  13.5  e. 


stood  it.  The  only  reason  alleged  for 
this  is,  that  there  are  things  affirmed 
here  of  the  'king'  vehich  could  not  be 
true  of  Antiochus.  But,  in  opposition  to 
this,  it  may  be  observed  (a)  that  the  allu- 
sion in  the  previous  verses  is  undoubtedly 
to  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  (b)  There  is 
no  indication  of  any  chaiir/e,  for  the  pro- 
phetic narrative  seems  to  proceed  as  if 
the  allusion  to  the  same  person  continued, 
(c)  The  word  '  kuirj'  is  not  a  word  to  be 
applied  to  Antichrist,  it  being  nowhere 
used  of  him.  (d)  Such  a  transition, 
without  any  more  decided  marks  of  it, 
would  not  be  in  accordance  with  the  usual 
method  in  the  prophetic  writings,  leaving 
a  plain  prediction  in  the  very  midst  of 
the  description,  and  passing  on  at  once  to 
a  representation  of  one  who  would  arise 
after  many  hundred  years,  and  of  whom 
the  former  could  be  considered  as  in  nc 
way  the  type.  The  most  obvious  and 
honest  way,  therefore,  of  interpreting 
this  is,  to  refer  it  to  Antiochus,  and  per- 
haps wo  shall  find  that  the  difficulty  of 
applying  it  to  him  is  not  insuperible. 
^  And  he  shall  exalt  himself.  No  one 
can  doubt  that  this  will  agree  with  Anti- 
ochus Epiphanes — a  proud,  haughty,  ab- 
solute, and  stern  monarch,  the  purpose 
of  whose  reign  was  to  exalt  hitaself,  and 
to  extend  the  limits  of  his  empire.  ^  And 
maijnify  himself  above  every  (fod.  That 
is,  by  directing  what  gods' should  or 
should  not  bo  worshipped;  attempting 
to  displace  the  claim  of  every  one  who 
was  worshipped  as  God  at  his  pleasure, 
and  establishing  the  vrorship  of  other 
gods  in  their  place.  Thus  he  assumed 
the  right  to  determine  what  God  should 
be  worshipped  in  Jerusalem,  abolishing 
the  worship  of  Jehovah,  and  setting  up 
that  of  Jupiter  Olympius  in  the  stead; 
and  so  throughout  his  whole  dominion, 
by  a  proclamation,  he  forbade  the  wor- 
ship cf  any  god  but  his,  1  Mac.  i.  44 — 51 ; 
Jos.  Ant.  E.  xij.  ch.  v.  g  4,  5.  One  who 
assumes  or  claims  the  right  to  forbid  the 
cidoralion  of  any  particular  god,  and  to 
order  divine  homage  to  be  rendered  to 
any  one  which  he  chooses,  exalts  himself 
ibove  the  gods,  as  he  in  this  way  denies 


the  right  which  they  must  be  supposed  to 
claim  to  prescribe  their  own  worship. 
•[  And  shall  speak  7narvellous  thi)in». 
The  Hebrew  word — niN'7SJ — would  pro- 
perly denote  things  wonderful,  or  fitted 
to  excite  astonishment;  things  that  are 
unusual  and  extraordinary :  and  the 
meaning  here  is,  that  the  things  spoken 
would  be  so  impious  and  atrocious — so 
amazing  and  wonderful  for  their  wicked- 
ness, as  to  produce  amazement.  *^  Against 
the  Godof  fjods.  The  true  God,  Jehovah  ; 
he  is  supreme,  and  is  superior  to  all  that 
is  called  God,  or  that  is  worshipped  as 
such.  Nothing  could  be  better  descrip- 
ti7e  of  Antiochus  than  this;  nothing  was 
ever  more  strikingly  fulfilled  than  this 
was  in  him.  ^^^  And  shall  prosper  till  the 
indifjnatiou  be  accomplished.  Keferring 
still  to  the  fact  that  there  was  an  ap- 
pointed time  during  which  this  was  to 
continue.  That  time  might  well  be  called 
a  time  of  '  indignation,' for  the  Lord 
seemed  to  be  angry  against  his  temple 
and  people,  and  sufi'ered  this  heathen 
king  to  pour  out  his  wrath  without  mea- 
sure against  the  temple,  the  city,  and 
the  whole  land.  ^  For  that  that  is  de- 
termined shall  be  done.  What  is  purposed 
in  regard  to  the  city  and  temple,  and  to 
all  other  things  must  be  accomplished, 
Comp.  ch.  X.  21.  The  angel  here  states 
a  general  truth— that  all  that  God  has 
ordained  will  come  to  pass.  The  appli- 
cation of  this  truth  here  is,  that  the  series 
of  events  must  be  suffered  to  run  on,  and 
that  it  could  not  be  expected  that  they 
would  be  arrested,  until  all  that  had  been 
determined  in  the  divine  mind  should  be 
efi"ected.  They  who  would  suffer,  there- 
fore, in  those  times  must  wait  with  pa- 
tience until  the  divine  purposes  should 
be  brought  about,  and  when  the  period 
should  arrive,  the  calamities  would  cease. 
37.  Neither  shall  he  regard  the  God  of 
his  fathers.  The  God  that  his  fathers  or 
ancestors  had  worshipped.  That  is,  he 
would  not  be  bound  or  restrained  by  the 
religion  of  his  own  land,  or  by  any  of  the 
usual  laws  of  religion.  He  would  wor- 
ship any  God  that  he  pleased,  or  none  aJ 


B.  C.  534. 1 


CHAPTER    XI. 


463 


God  of  his  fathers,  nor  the  desire  of 

»2Th.  2.4. 


ho  pleased.  The  usual  restraints  that 
bind  men — the  restraints  derived  from 
the  religion  of  their  ancestors — would  in 
his  case  be  of  no  avail.  See  Notes  on 
ver.  36.  This  was  in  all  respects  true  of 
Antiochus.  At  bis  pleasure  he  worship- 
ped the  gods  commonly  adored  in  his 
country,  or  the  gods  worshipped  by  the 
Greeks  and  llouians,  or  no  gods.  And, 
in  a  special  manner,  instead  of  honouring 
the  God  of  his  fathers,  and  causing  the 
image  of  that  God  to  be  placed  in  the 
temple  at  Jerusalem,  as  it  might  have 
been  supposed  ho  would,  he  caused  the 
altar  of  Jupiter  Olyrapius  to  be  set  up 
there  and  his  worship  to  be  celebrated 
there.  In  fact,  as  Antiochus  had  been 
educated  abroad,  and  had  passed  his 
early  life  in  foreign  countries,  he  had 
never  paid  much  respect  to  the  religion 
of  his  own  land.  The  attempt  to  intro- 
duce a  foreign  religion  into  Judea,  was 
an  attempt  to  introduce  the  religion  of  the 
Greeks  (Jahn,  Ileb.  Commonwealth,  p. 
267),  ami  in  no  instance  did  he  endeavour 
to  force  upon  them  the  peculiar  religion 
of  his  own  nation.  In  his  private  feel- 
ings, therefore,  and  in  his  public  acts,  it 
might  be  said  of  Antiochus,  that  he  was 
characterized  in  an  eminent  degree  by  a 
want  of  regard  for  the  faith  of  his  ances- 
tors. The  language  used  hero  by  the  an- 
gel is  that  which  would  properly  denote 
great  infidelity  and  impiety.  ^  Nor  the 
desire  of  women.  The  phrase  *  the  de- 
sire of  women'  is  in  itself  ambiguous,  and 
maj'  either  mean  what  thei/  desire,  that  is, 
what  is  agreeable  to  them,  or  what  they 
commonly  seek,  and  for  which  they  would 
plead ;  or  it  may  mean  his  own  desire ; 
that  is,  that  he  would  not  be  restrained 
by  the  desire  of  women — by  any  regard 
for  women,  for  honourable  matrimony, 
or  by  irregular  passion.  The  phrase  here 
is  probably  to  be  taken  in  the  former 
sense,  as  this  best  suits  the  connection. 
There  has  been  great  variety  in  the  in- 
terpretation of  this  expression.  Some 
have  maintained  that  it  cannot  be  appli- 
cable to  Antiochus  at  all,  since  ho  was  a 
man  eminently  licentious  and  under  the 
influence  of  abandoned  women.  Jerome, 
in  loc,  J.  D.  Michaclis,  Dereser,  Gesenius, 
and  Lengerke  suppose  that  this  means 
that  he  would  rot  regard  the  beautiful 


women,  nor  regard  any  {^od  •  for  he 
shall  magnify  himself  above  '  all. 


statue  of  the  goddess  Venus  whose  tem- 
plo  was  in  Elyniais,  which  ho  plundered. 
Staudlin  and  Dathe,  that  ho  would  not 
regard  the  weeping  or  tears  of  women ; 
that  is,  that  he  would  be  cruel.  Bertholdt, 
that  he  would  not  spare  little  children — 
the  object  of  a  mother's  love;  that  is, 
that  he  would  be  a  cruel  tyrant.  Jerome 
renders  it,  Et  erit  in  conciipiscentiis  foe- 
iniiianim,  and  explains  it  of  unbridled 
lust,  and  applies  it  principally  to  Antio- 
chus. Elliott,  strangely  it  seems  to  mo 
(Apocalypse  iv.  152J,  interprets  it  as  re- 
ferring to  that  which  was  so  much  the 
object  of  desire  among  the  Hebrew  wo- 
men— the  Messiah,  the  promised  seed  of 
the  woman ;  and  he  says  that  he  had 
found  this  opinion  hinted  at  by  Faber 
on  the  Prophecies  (Ed.  5),  i.  380—385. 
Others  expound  it,  as  signifying  that  he 
would  not  regard  honourable  matrimony, 
but  would  be  given  to  unlawful  pleasures. 
It  may  not  be  practicable  to  determine 
with  certainty  the  meaning  of  the  expres- 
sion, but  it  seems  to  me  that  the  design 
of  the  whole  is  to  set  forth  the  impiety 
and  hard-heartedness  of  Antiochus.  He 
would  not  regard  the  gods  of  his  fathers  ; 
that  is,  he  would  not  be  controlled  by  any 
of  the  principles  of  the  religion  in  which 
he  had  been  educated,  but  would  set  them 
all  at  defiance,  and  would  do  as  he  pleased; 
and,  in  like  manner,  he  would  be  unaf- 
fected by  the  influences  derived  from  the 
female  character — would  disregard  the 
objects  that  were  nearest  to  their  hearts, 
their  sentiments  of  kindness  and  com- 
passion ;  their  pleadings  and  their  tears  : 
— he  would  be  a  cruel  tyrant,  alike  re- 
gardless of  all  the  restraints  derived  from 
heaven  and  earth— the  best  influences 
from  above  and  from  below.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  say  that  this  agrees  exactly 
with  the  character  of  Antiochus.  He 
was  sensual  and  corrupt,  and  given  to 
licentious  indulgence,  and  was  incapa- 
ble of  honourable  and  pure  love,  and 
was  a  stranger  to  all  those  bland  and  pure 
affections  produced  by  intercourse  with 
refined  and  enlightened  females.  If  one 
wishes  to  describe  a  high  state  of  tyranny 
and  depravity  in  a  man,  it  cannot  be  done 
better  than  by  saying  that  ho  disregard» 
whatever  is  attractive  and  interesting  to 
a  virtuous  female  mind.     ^  Nor  regard 


4G4 


DANIEL 


[B.  C.  534. 


38  But  Mn  his  ''estate  shall   he 

"as  for  the  almighty   God,  in  his  seat  he  shall 
honour,  yea,  he  shall  hono^ir  a  God,  Sn.: 

anj/  god.  Any  religious  restraints  what- 
ever— the  laws  of  any  god  worshipped  in 
his  own  land  or  elsewhere — in  heaven  or 
on  earth.  That  is,  he  would  be  utterly 
irreligious  in  heart,  and  where  it  con- 
flicted with  his  purposes  would  set  at 
nought  every  consideration  derived  from 
reverence  to  God.  This  harmonizes  well 
with  the  previous  declaration  about  wo- 
men. Tho  two  commonly  go  together. 
He  that  is  unrestrained  by  the  attractive 
virtues  of  the  female  mind  and  character  ; 
he  that  has  no  regard  for  the  sj'mpathies 
and  kindnesses  that  interest  virtuous  fe- 
males ;  he  that  sees  nothing  lovely  in 
what  commonly  engages  their  thoughts  ; 
and  he  that  throws  himself  beyond  the 
restraints  of  their  society,  and  tho  elTects 
of  their  conversation,  is  commonly  .a  man 
who  cuts  himself  loose  from  all  religion, 
and  is  at  the  same  time  a  despiser  of  vir- 
tuous females,  and  of  God.  No  one  will 
expect  piety  towards  God  to  be  found  in 
a  bosom  that  sees  nothing  to  interest  him 
in  the  sympathies  and  virtues  of  the  fe- 
male mind;  and  the  character  of  a  woman- 
hater  and  a  hater  of  God  will  uniformly 
be  found  united  in  the  same  person. 
Such  a  person  was  Antiochus  Epiphanes; 
and  such  men  have  often  been  found  in 
the  world.  ^  For  he  shall  magnifij  him- 
self above  all.  Above  all  the  restraints 
of  religion,  and  all  those  derived  from  the 
intercourse  of  virtuous  social  life — setting 
at  nought  all  the  restraints  that  usually 
bind  men.  Comp.  Notes  on  ch.  viii.  10, 11. 
38.  Hut  in  his  estate.  The  marginal 
reading  hero  is,  '  As  for  the  almighty  God 
in  his  seat,  he  shall  honour,  yea,  he  shall 
honour  a  god,  &c.'  The  more  correct 
rendering,  however,  is  that  in  the  text, 
and  the  reference  is  to  some  god  which 
he  would  honour,  or  for  which  he  would 
show  respect.  The  rendering  proposed 
by  Lengerke  is  the  true  rendering,  'But 
the  god  of  forces  [firm  places,  fastnesses 
■ — der  Vesten]  he  shall  honour  in  their 
foundation'  [auf  seinem  Gestelle.]  The 
Vulgate  renders  this,  '  But  tho  God  Mao- 
zim  shall  he  honour  in  his  place.'  So 
also  tho  Greek.  The  phrase 'in  his  es- 
tate'—  1J?— 7JJ — means  properly,  'upon 
his  base,'  or  foundation.  It  occurs  in  vs. 
20,  21,  where  it  is  applied  to  a  monarch 


hoDoui'  the  god  of  c forces:  and   i» 

L  or,  stead. 
'^  Mau:!im,  or,  God's  jirotcctors;  or,  munitions. 


who  would  succeed  another — occupying 
the  same  place,  or  the  same  seat  or 
throne.  See  Notes  on  ver.  2.  Here 
it  seems  to  mean  that  he  would  hon- 
our the  god  referred  to  in  the  place 
which  he  occupied,  or,  as  it  were,  on  bis 
own  throne,  or  in  his  own  temple.  Tho 
margin  is,  'or  stead;'  but  the  idea  is 
not  that  he  would  honour  this  god  in- 
stead, of  another,  but  that  he  would  do  it 
in  his  own  place.  If,  however,  as  Gese- 
nius  and  De  Wette  suppose,  the  sense  is, 
'in  his  place,  or  stead,'  the  correct  inter- 
pretation is,  that  he  would  honour  this 
'god  offerees,'  in  the  stead  of  honouring 
the  God  of  bis  fathers,  or  any  other  god. 
The  general  idea  is  clear,  that  he  would 
show  disrespect  or  contempt  for  all  other 
gods,  and  pay  his  devotions  to  this  god 
alone.  ^  Shall  he  honour.  Pay  respect 
to;  worship;  obey.  This  would  be  his 
god.  He  would  show  no  respect  to  the 
God  of  his  fathers,  nor  to  any  of  the  idols 
usually  worshipped,  but  would  honour 
th  is  god  exclusively.  ^  The  god  of  forces. 
Marg.,  3Iauzzim,  or,  gods  2^''otectors,  or 
munitions,  lleh.  D^Y),":^ ,  Mauzzim.  Latin 
Vulg.,  Maozim  ;  Gr. /^atofti/i;  Syriac,  'the 
strong  God;'  Luther,  mausim ;  Lengerke, 
der  Vesten — fastnesses,  fortresses.  The 
Hebrew  word — tij'r — means,  properly,  a 
strong  or  fortiiied  place;  a  fortress;  and 
Gesenius  {Lex.)  supposes  that  the  refer- 
ence here  is  to  "the  god  of  fortresses,  a 
deitj'  of  tho  Syrians  obtruded  upon  the 
Jews,  perhaps  liars."  So  also  Grotius, 
C.  B.  Michrelis,  Stiiudlin,  Bertholdt,  and 
AViner.  Dereser,  Havcrnick,  and  Len- 
gerke explain  it  as  referring  to  the  Ju- 
piter Capitolinus  that  Antiochus  had 
learned  to  worship  by  his  long  residence 
in  Rome,  and  whose  worship  he  trans 
fcrred  to  bis  own  countrj'.  There  has 
been  no  little  speculation  as  to  the  mean- 
ing of  this  passage,  and  as  to  the  god  hero 
referred  to ;  but  it  would  seem  that  the 
general  idea  is  plain.  It  is,  that  the  only 
god  which  be  would  acknowledge  would 
beyorcp,  or  iwu-er,  or  dominion.  lie  would 
set  at  nought  the  worship  of  the  God  of 
his  fathers,  and  all  the  usual  obligations 
and  restraints  of  religion  ;  he  would  dis- 
card and  despise  all  the  pleadings  of  hu- 
manity and  kindness,  as  if  they  were  the 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER  XI. 


465 


god   -whom   liis    fathers    knew   not   ver,  and  with  precious  stones,  and 
shall  ho  honour  with  gold,  with  sil-  with  ^pleasant  thin"-s. 

» things  desired.   Is.  4-1.  9. 


weaknesses  of  women,  and  he  would  depend 
solely  on   force.     He   ■would,  as   it  were, 
adore  only  the  'god  of  force,'  and  carry 
his  purposes,  not  by  right,  or  by  the  claims 
of  religion,  but  by  arms.     The  meaning 
is    not,  I   apprehend,  tliat   he  would  for- 
mally setup  this  '  god  of  forces'  and  adore 
him,  but  that  this  would   be,  in  fact,  the 
onli/  god   that  he   would  practically  ac- 
knowledge,    lu  selecting  such  a  god  a3 
would  properly  represent  his  feelings,  he 
would  choose  such  an   one  as  would  de- 
noto  force  or  dominion.    Such  a  god  would 
be  the  god  of  war,  or  the  Roman  Jupiter, 
who,  as  being  supreme,   and  ruling  the 
world  by  his  mere  power,  would  be  a  fit 
representative  of  the  prevailing  purpose 
of  the  Messiah.     The  general  sentiment' 
is,   that  all   obligations    of  religion,  and 
justice,  and  compassion,  would  be  disre-  j 
garded,  and  he  would  carry  his  purposes  | 
by  mere  power,  with   the  idea,  perhaps, 
included,  as  seems  to  be  implied  in  the  I 
remainder   of   the  verse,  that  be    would : 
set  up  and  adore  such  a   foreign  god  as 
would  be  a  suitable  representation  of  this 
purpose.     It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say  , 
that  this  was  eminently  true  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  ;  and   it  may  be  equally  said  ! 
to  be  true  of  all  the  great  heroes  and  con- 
querors of  the  world.     Mars,  the  god  of  ] 
war,  was  thus   adored   openly  in   ancient ' 
times,  and  the  devotion  of  heroes  and  con-  { 
querors  to  that  idol  god,  though  less  open  j 
and  formal,  has  not  been  less  real  by  the  i 
heroes  and  conquerors  of  modern  times  ; 
and,  as  wo  say  now  of  an  avaricious  or  : 
covetous  man  that  he  is  a  worshipper  of  : 
mammon,  though  he  in  fact  formally  wor- 
ships no  god,  and  has  no  altar,  so  it  might 
be  affirmed  of  Antiochus,  and  may  be  of 
heroes  and  conquerors  in  general,  that  the  ' 
only  god  that   is   honoured   is   the  god  of 
war,  of  power,  of  force;  and  that  setting  i 
at  naught  all  the  obligations  of  religion,  ' 
and  of  worship  of  the  true  God,  they  pay  I 
their  devotions  to  this  god  alone.     Next 
to  mammon,  the  god  that  is  most  adored 
in  this  world  is  the  'god  of  force' — this 
3I:iuzzim    that    Antiochus    so    faithfully 
served.     In  illustration  of  the  fact  that 
seems  here  to  be  implied,  that  he  would  ; 
introduce  such  a  god  as  would   be  a  fit 
'epraientative  of  this  purpose  of  his  life,  I 


:  it  may  be  remarked  that,  when  in  Rome, 
j  where  Antiochus  spent  his  early  years, 
j  he  had  learned  to  worship  the  Jupiter  of 
the  capitol,  and  that  he  endeavoured  to 
introduce  the  worship  of  that  foreign  god 
I  into  Syria.  Of  this  fact  there  can  be  no 
j  doubt.  It  was  one  of  the  characteristics 
of  Antiochus  that  he  imitated  the  man- 
I  ners  and  customs  of  tho  Romans  to  a  ri- 
diculous extent  (Diod.  Sic.  Frag.  x.wi. 
65),  and  it  was  a  fact  that  he  sent  rich 
gifts  to  Rome  in  honour  of  the  Jupiter 
worshipped  there  (Livy  Ixii.  G),  and  that 
he  purposed  to  erect  a  magnificent  tem- 
ple in  honour  of  Jupiter  Capitolinus  in 
Antioch,  Livy  xli.  20.  This  temple,  how- 
ever,  was  not  completed.  It  will  be  re- 
membered, also,  that  ho  caused  an  altar 
to  Jupiter  to  be  erected  over  the  altar  of 
burnt-sacrifice  in  Jerusalem.  It  should 
be  added  that  they  who  apply  this  to  An- 
tichrist, or  the  Pope,  refer  it  to  idol  or 
image  worship.  Elliott  (Apocalypse,  iv. 
153J  supposes  that  it  relates  to  the  hom- 
age paid  to  the  saints  and  martyrs  under 
the  Papacy,  and  says  that  an  appellation 
answering  to  the  word  Mahuzzim,  was 
actually  given  to  the  departed  martyrs 
and  Saints  under  tho  Papal  apostacy. 
Thus  he  remarks:  "As  to  what  is  said 
of  the  wilful  king's  honouring  the  god 
Mahuzzim  (a  god  whom  his  fathers  knew 
not)  in  place  of  his  ancestors'  god,  and 
the  true  God,  it  seems  to  me  to  have 
been  well  and  consistently  explained,  by 
a  reference  to  those  uninti,  and  their  re- 
lics and  imcif/es,  which  the  apostacy  from 
its  first  development  regarded  and  wor- 
shipped as  the  Mahuzzim,  or  furtresscs 
of  tho  places  where  they  were  depos- 
ited." Apoc.  iv.  157.  But  all  this  ap- 
pears forced  and  unnatural ;  and  if  it  be 
supposed  uiat  it  was  designed  to  refer  to 
Antichrist  or  the  Papacy,  no  application 
of  the  liin(/nnge  can  be  found  so  obvious 
and  appropriate  as  that  which  supposes 
that  it  refers  to  Antiochus,  and  to  his  re- 
liance ou  force  rather  than  on  justice  and 
right.  H  And  a  god  whom  his  fathers  kncui 
not.  This  foreign  god,  Jupiter,  whom  he 
had  learned  to  worship  at  Rome.  ^  Hhull 
he  honour  with  <jold,  with  silver,  and  with 
precious  stones,  &c.  That  is,  he  chall 
lavish  these  tilings  on  buildin,<?  a  tempi* 


46b 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  5M 


39  Thus  shall  he  do  in  the  '  most , increase  with  glory:  and  he  shall 
strong  holds  with  a  strange  god, '  cause  them  to  rule  over  manj',  and 
whom   he   shall   acknowledge,  a?!cZ  shall  divide  the  land  for  ''gain. 

'^  fortresses  of  munitiaiis.  1  ^ a  price. 


for  him,  or  in  his  irans;e.  This  accords 
with  the  account  which  Livy  gives  (xli. 
20)  of  the  temple  which  he  commenced 
at  Antioch  in  honour  of  Jupiter.  Livy 
says  that,  although  in  his  conduct  he  was 
profligate,  and  although  in  manj'  things 
it  was  supposed  that  ho  was  deranged — 
Qiiido/n  hand  diihie  iiiscitrire  aicbaut — 3'et 
that  in  two  respects  he  was  distinguished 
for  having  a  noble  mind- — for  his  worship 
of  the  gods,  and  for  the  favour  towards 
cities  in  adorning  them  :  In  dtiabus  tamen 
marjnis  honestisque  rebus  fere  rcjiiis  erat 
animus,  in  vrbinm  doni's,  ct  deoriim  ctdtu. 
He  then  adds,  in  words  that  are  all  the 
commentary  which  we  need  in  the  pas- 
sage V)efore  us  :  JMarjnijjccntier  vera  in  deos 
vel  Jovis  Oli/mpti  tcrnplitrn  Athenis,  iincem 
in  terris  inchoatum  pro  victr/nitudine  dei, 
2)ntest  testis  esse.  Sed  et  Delon  arts  insig- 
lu'biis  statuarnmque  copia  cxornavit  ;  et 
Antiochlce  Jovis  capitolini  tnar/nijicum 
temphim,  von  laqueatum  anro  tantuin,  sed 
parietibus  totis  ta?iiina  inanratuni,  et  alia 
vitdta  in  aliis  locis  pol/icitus,  quia  pcr- 
hrere  tempns  regni  ejus  fiiit,  non  perfecit. 
*[  And  with  pleasant  thiufjs.  Marg.,  things 
desired.  That  is,  with  ornaments,  or  sta- 
tuary, or  perhaps  pictures.  Comp.  Notes 
on  Isa.  ii.  10.  He  meant  that  the  temple 
should  be  beautified  and  adorned  in  the 
highest  degree.  This  temple,  Livy  says, 
he  did  not  live  to  finish. 

.39.  Thtis  shall  he  do  in  the  most  strong- 
holds. Marg.,  fortresses  of  munitions. — 
The  reference  is  to  strongly  fortified 
places ;  to  those  places  which  had  been 
made  strong  for  purposes  of  defence. — 
The  i/lea  is,  that  he  would  carry  on  his 
purposes  against  these  places,  as  it  were, 
under  the  auspices  of  this  strange  god. 
It  was  a  fact,  that  in  his  wars  Antiochus 
came  into  possession  of  the  strong  places, 
or  the  fortified  towns  of  the  nations  which 
he  attacked — .Jerusalem,  Sidon,  Pelu- 
sium,  Memphis — then  among  the  strong- 
est places  in  the  world.  ^  With  n  strange 
god.  A  foreign  god  whom  his  fathers  did 
not  acknowledge ;  that  is,  according  to 
the  supposition  above,  and  according  to 
the  fact,  with  the  god  whom  he  had 
adored  at  Home,  and  whose  worship  he 
vas  ambitious  to  transfer  to  his  own  em- 


pire— the  Jupiter  of  the  capitol.  lie 
seemed  to  be  acting  under  the  auspices 
of  this  foreign  god.  ^  Tl7(oHi  he  shall 
acknowledge.  By  building  temples  and 
altars  to  him.  ^  And  increase  u-ith  glory. 
That  is,  with  honour.  He  would  seem 
to  increase  or  extend  his  dominion  in 
the  world,  by  introducing  his  worship 
in  his  own  country  and  in  the  lands 
which  he  would  conquer.  Before,  his 
dominion  appeared  to  be  only  at  Rome; 
Antiochus  sought  that  it  might  be  ex- 
tended f;irther,  over  his  own  kingdom, 
and  over  the  countries  that  he  would 
conquer.  ^  And  he  shall  cause  them  to 
rule  over  mantj.  That  is,  the  foreign 
gods.  Mention  bad  been  made  before 
of  only  one  God;  but  the  introduction  of 
the  worship  of  Jupiter  would  be  naturally 
connected  with  that  of  the  other  gods  of 
Rome,  and  they  are,  therefore,  referred 
to  in  this  manner.  The  conquests  of 
Antiochus  would  seem  to  be  setting  up 
the  dominion  of  these  gods  over  the  lands 
which  he  subdued.  ^[  And  shall  divide 
the  land  for  gain.  Marg.,  a  price.  The 
reference  here  is,  probably,  to  the  holy 
land,  and  the  idea  is  that  it  would  be 
partitioned  out  among  his  followers  for 
a  price,  or  with  a  view  to  gain  ;  that  is, 
perhaps,  that  it  would  be  'farmed  out' 
for  the  purpose  of  raising  revenue,  and 
that,  with  this  view,  as  often  occurred,  it 
would  be  set  up  for  sale  to  the  highest 
bidder.  This  was  a  common  way  of 
raising  revenue,  by  'farming  out'  a  con- 
quered province  ;  that  is,  by  disposing  of 
the  privilege  of  raising  a  revenue  in  it  to 
the  one  who  would  offer  most  for  it,  and 
the  consequence  w.as,  that  it  gave  rise  to 
vast  rapacity  in  extorting  funds  from  the 
people.  Comp.  1  Mac.  iii.  35,  .36,  where, 
speaking  of  Lysias,  whom  Antiochus  had 
'set  to  oversee  the  affairs  of  the  king 
from  the  river  Euphrates  unto  the  bor- 
ders of  Egypt,'  it  is  said  of  Antiochus 
that  he  ''gave  him  [Lysias]  charge  of  all 
things  that  he  would  have  done,  as  als> 
concerning  them  that  dwelt  in  Judea  and 
Jerusalem,  to  wit,  that  he  would  send  an 
army  against  them,  to  destroy  and  root 
out  the  strength  of  Israel,  and  the  rem- 
nant  of  Jerusalem,   and   to   take  away 


B.C.  534.]  CHAPTER   XI.  467 

40  f  And  at  the  time  of  the  end '  shall  the  king  of  the  south  push  at 


their  memorial  from  that  place  ;  and  that 
he  should  place  strangers  in  all  their 
quarters,  and  divide  their  land  hy  lot." 

40.  And  at  the  time  of  the  end.  See 
ver.  35.  The  'time  of  the  end'  must 
properly  denote  the  end  or  consummation 
of  the  series  of  events  under  considera- 
tion, or  the  matter  in  hand,  and  properly 
and  obviously  means  here  the  end  or 
consummation  of  the  transactions  which 
had  been  referred  to  in  the  previous  part  of 
the  vision.  It  is  equivalent  to  what  we 
would  say  by  expressing  it  thus :  '  at 
the  winding  up  of  the  aifair.'  In  ch.  xii. 
4,  9,  13,  the  word  '  end,'  however,  ob- 
viously refers  to  another  cXosa  or  consum- 
mation— the  end  or  consummation  of  the 
affairs  that  reach  far  into  the  future — 
the  final  dispensation  of  this  in  this 
world.  It  has  been  held  by  many  that 
this  could  not  be  understood  as  referring 
to  Antiochus,  because  what  is  hero  stated 
did  not  occur  in  the  close  of  his  reign. 
Perhaps  the  most  obvious  interpretation 
of  what  is  said  in  this  and  the  subsequent 
verses  to  the  end  of  the  chapter  would 
be,  that,  after  the  series  of  events  referred 
to  in  the  previous  verses  ,•  after  Anti- 
ochus had  invaded  Egypt,  and  had  been 
driven  thence  by  the  fear  of  the  Romans, 
ho  would,  in  the  close  of  his  reign, 
again  attack  that  countrj',  and  bring 
it,  and  Lybia,  and  Ethiopia  into  subjec- 
tion (ver.  42) ;  and  that  when  there,  tid- 
ings out  of  the  north  should  compel  him 
to  abandon  the  expedition  and  return 
again  to  his  own  land.  Porphyry  (see 
Jerome,  in  loc),  snys  that  this  was  so, 
and  that  Antiochus  actually  invaded 
Egypt  in  the  *  eleventh  year  of  his  reign,'  j 
which  was  the  year  before  ho  died  ;  and  | 
he  maintained,  therefore,  that  all  this! 
had  a  literal  application  to  Antiochus, 
and  that  being  so  literally  true,  it  must ! 
have  been  written  after  the  events  had 
occurred.  Unfortunately  the  thirteen  ' 
books  of  Porphyry  are  lost,  and  we  have ' 
only  the  fragments  of  his  works  preserved 
which  are  to  be  found  in  the  Commentary  j 
of  Jerome  on  the  Book  of  Daniel,  The 
statement  of  Porphyry,  referred  to  by 
Jerome,  is  contrary  to  the  otherwise  uni- ! 
versal  testimony  of  history  about  the  last 
iays  of  Antiochus,  and  there  are  such  j 
improbabilities  in  the  statement  as  to  i 
.oare  the  general  impression  tkat  Por- 1 


phyry  in  this  respect  falsified  history  in 
order  to  make  it  appear  that  this  must 
have  been  written  after  the  events  re- 
ferred to.  If  the  statement  of  Porphyry 
were  correct,  there  would  be  no  difficulty 
in  applying  this  to  Antiochus.  The 
common  belief,  however,  in  regard  to 
I  Antiochus  is,  that  he  did  not  invade 
Egypt  after  the  series  of  events  referred 
to  above,  and  after  ho  had  been  required 
to  retire  by  the  authority  of  the  Roman 
ambassadors  as  stated  in  the  Notes  on 
ver.  30.  This  belief  accords  also  with 
all  the  probabilities  of  the  case.  Under 
these  circumstances,  many  commentators 
have  supposed  that  this  portion  of  the 
■  chapter  (vs.  40 — 45)  could  not  refer  to 
'Antiochus,  and  they  have  applied  it  to 
Antichrist,  or  to  the  Roman  power.  Yet 
how  forced  and  unnatural  such  an  appli- 
cation must  be,  any  one  can  perceive  by 
examining  Newton  on  the  Prophecies,  pp. 
j  30S — 315.  The  obvious,  and  perhaps  it 
may  be  added  the  honest,  application  of 
1  the  passage  must  be  to  Antiochns.  This 
j  is  that  which  would  occur  to  any  reader 
I  of  the  prophecy;  this  is  that  which  ho 
would  obviously  hold  to  be  the  true  ap- 
plication ,•  and  this  is  that  only  which 
would  occur  to  any  one,  unless  it  were 
deemed  necessary  to  bend  the  prophecy 
to  accommodate  it  to  the  history.  Hon- 
esty and  fairness,  it  seems  to  me,  require 
that  we  should  understand  this  as  refer- 
ring to  the  series  of  events  which  had 
been  described  in  the  previous  portion 
of  the  chapter,  and  as  designed  to  state 
the  ultimate  issue  or  close  of  the  whole. 

There  will  be  no  difficulty  in  this  if  we 
may  regard  these  verses  (40 — 45)  as  con- 
taining a  recapitulation,  or  a  summing  up 
of  the  series  of  events,  with  a  statement 
of  the  manner  in  v.'hich  they  would  close. 
If  so  interpreted,  all  will  be  clear.  It 
will  then  be  a  general  statement  of  what 
would  occur  in  regard  to  this  remarkable 
transaction  that  would  so  materially  affect 
the  interests  of  religion  in  Judea,  and  be 
such  an  important  chapter  in  the  history 
of  the  world.  This  summing  up,  more- 
over, would  give  occasion  to  mention 
some  circumstances  in  regard  to  the  con- 
quests of  Antiochus  which  could  not  so  well 
be  introduced  in  the  narrative  itself,  and 
to  present,  in  few  words,  a  summary  of 
all   that  would   occur,  and  to   state  the 


468 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534 


him  :   and   the   king   of  the   north  f  tries,  and   shall   overflow  and  pass 
shall    come    against   him    like    » a '  over. 

whirlwind,  witli  chariots,  and  with  [      41   He  shall  enter  also  into  the 

horsemen,  and   with   many   ships  ;  i  ^  glorious  '  land  and  many  countries 

and    he    shall    enter   into   the    COun-     ^  land of  ddigU,  or,  on,aweni,OT,  goodly  land 

'  Zee.  9.  1-1.  c  ver.  16, 45. 


manner  in  which  all  would  be  terminated. 
Such  a  summing  up,  or  recapitulation,  is 
not  uncommon,  and,  in  this  way,  the  im- 
pression of  the  whole  would  be  more  dis- 
dinct.  With  this  view,  the  phrase 'and 
at  the  time  of  the  end'  (ver.  40),  would 
refer,  not  so  much  to  the  '  time  of  the 
end'  of  the  reign  of  Antiochus,  but  the 
'  time  of  the  end'  of  the  whole  series  of 
the  transactions  referred  to  by  the  angel 
as  recorded  'in  the  Scriptures  of  truth,' 
(ch.  X.  21),  from  the  time  of  Darius  the 
Jlede  (ch.  xi.  1),  to  the  close  of  the  reign 
of  Antiochus — a  series  of  events  em- 
bracing a  period  of  some  three  hundred 
and  fifty  years.  Viewed  in  reference  to 
this  long  period,  the  whole  reign  of  An- 
tiochus, which  was  only  eleven  j'ears, 
might  be  regarded  as  '  the  time  of  the 
end.'  It  was,  indeed,  the  most  disastrous 
portion  of  the  whole  period,  and  in  this 
chapter  it  occupies  more  space  than  all 
that  went  before  it — for  it  was  to  be  the 
time  of  the  peculiar  .and  dreadful  trial  of 
the  Hebrew  people,  but  it  was  '  the  end' 
of  the  matter — the  winding  up  of  the 
series — the  closing  of  the  events  on  which 
the  ej'e  of  the  angel  was  iixed,  and  which 
were  so  important  to  be  known  before- 
hand. In  these  verses,  therefore,  (40 — 
45.)  be  sums  up  what  would  occur  in 
what  he  here  calls  appropriately  '  the 
time  of  the  end' — the  period  when  the 
predicted  termination  of  this  series  of  im- 
portant events  should  arrive — to  wit,  in 
the  brief  and  eventful  reign  of  Antiochus. 
^  ,S7ia/;  be  king  of  the  South.  The  king 
of  Egypt.  See  vs.  5,  6,  9.  ^  Push  at 
him.  As  in  the  wars  referred  to  in  the 
previous  verse — in  endeavouring  to  ex- 
pel him  from  Coeles}'ria  and  Palestine, 
and  from  Egypt  itself,  vs.  25,  29,  30. 
See  Notes  on  these  verses.  %  And  the 
hiufj  of  the  north  shall  come  against  him. 
The  king  of  Syria — Antiochus.  Against 
the  king  of  Egypt.  He  shall  repeatedly 
invade  his  lands.  See  the  Notes  above. 
*ll  Li/ce  a  whirlwind.  As  if  be  would 
sweep  everything  before  him.  This  he 
did  when  he  invaded  Egypt;  when  he 
•eized  on  Memphis,  and  the  best  portion 


of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  when  he  ob 
tained  possession  of  the  person  of  Ptol- 
emy. See  Notes  on  vs.  25 — 27.  %  With 
chariots,  and  icith  horsemen,  and  tcith 
many  shij^s.  All  this  literally  occurred 
in  the  successive  invasions  of  Egypt  by 
Antiochus.  See  the  Notes  above.  ^  And 
he  shall  enter  into  the  countries.  Into 
Coelesyria,  Palestine,  Egypt,  and  the  ad- 
jacent lands.  ^  And  shall  orerflow,  and 
pass  over.  Like  a  flood  he  shall  spread 
his  armies  over  these  countries.  See 
Notes  on  ver.  22. 

41.  He  shall  enter  also  into  the  glorious 
land.  Marg.,  land  of  delight,  or  orna- 
ment, or  goodly  land.  The  Hebrew  is, 
'land  of  ornament;'  that  is,  of  beauty,  to 
wit,  Palestine,  or  the  holy  land.  The 
same  word  is  used  in  ver.  16.  See  Notes 
on  that  place.  As  to  the  fact  that  ho 
would  invade  that  land,  see  Notes  on  vs. 
2S,  31 — 33.  •[  And  many  countries  shall 
he  overthrown.  The  word  countries  here 
is  supplied  by  the  translators.  The  He- 
brew word — iHOT — may  denoto  'many 
thing?,' and  might  refer  to  cities,  dwellings, 
institutions,  &c.  The  meaning  is,  that  ho 
would  produce  wide  devastation — which 
was  true  of  Antiochus,  when,  cither  per- 
sonally, or  by  his  generals,  he  invaded  tho 
land  of  Palestine.  See  the  Notes  above. 
^  Hut  these  shall  escape  out  of  his  hand, 
&c.  Intent  on  his  work  in  Palestine,  and 
having  enough  there  to  occupy  his  atten- 
tion, the  neighbouring  lands  of  Edom, 
Moab,  and  Ammon  shall  not  bo  molested 
by  him.  The  wrath  of  Antiochus  was 
particularly  against  the  Jews,  and  it  is 
not  a  little  remarkable  that  no  mention  is 
made  of  his  invading  these  adjacent 
countries.  The  route  which  he  pursued 
was  to  Egypt,  along  the  shores  of  the 
Mediterranean,  and  though  he  turned 
from  his  course  to  wreak  his  vengeance 
on  the  Jews,  yet  it  does  not  appear  that 
he  carried  his  arms  farther  from  the  main 
line  of  his  march.  Antiochus  was  prin- 
cipally engaged  with  the  Egyptians  and 
the  Piomans;  he  was  also  engaged  with 
the  Jews,  for  Palestine  had  been  the  battle- 


B.  C.  534.J 


CHAPTER   XI. 


469 


shall  be  overthrown;  but  these  shall 'also   upon   the   countries;  and  the 
„„„ 1,  ^e  I,:,.  1 4   r,! —    j^^jj^  p{-  Egypt  shall  not  escape. 

43  Eut  he  shall  have  power  over 
the  treasures  of  gold  and  of  silver, 
and  over  all  the  precious  things  of 

^  send  fortJi. 


escape  out  of  his  hand,  even  »Edom, 
and  Moab,  and  the  chief  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Amnion. 
42  He  shall  ^  stretch  forth  his  hand 

als.  11.14,15. 


field — the  main  place  and  object  of  con- 
tention between  tho  king  of  Syria  and 
the  king  of  Egypt.  Moab,  and  Edom, 
and  Ammon,  were  comparatively  remote 
from  tho  scene  of  conflict,  and  were 
left  unmolested.  It  would  seem  most 
probable,  also,  that  these  nations  were 
friendly  to  Antiochus,  and  were  in  alli- 
ance with  him,  or  at  least  it  is  certain 
that  they  were  hostile  to  tho  Jews,  which, 
for  the  purposes  of  Antiochus,  amounted 
to  the  same  thing.  Judas  Maccabeus  is 
represented  as  engaged  with  them  in  war, 
and  consequently  they  must  have  either 
been  in  alliance  with  Antiochus,  or  in 
some  other  way  promoting  his  interests. 
See  1  Mae.  iv.  CI,  v.  3,  0,  8,  9.  These 
countries  were,  therefore,  in  fact,  secure 
from  the  invasions  of  Antiochus,  and  so 
far  tho  prophecy  was  literally  fulfilled. 
It  may  be  added  («)  that  no  occurrence 
since  that  time  has  taken  place  to  which 
the  prophecy  can  with  propriety'  be  ap- 
plied; and  (i)  that  no  natural  sagacitj' 
could  have  foreseen  this,  and  that,  there- 
fore, if  the  prediction  was  uttered  be/ore 
the  days  of  Antiochus,  it  must  have  been 
the  result  of  divine  inspiration.  As  to 
the  former  of  these  remarks,  (a)  if  any 
one  is  desirous  of  seeing  how  forced  and 
unnatural  must  be  any  attempt  to  apply 
this  to  any  other  times  than  those  of  An- 
tiochus, he  has  only  to  consult  Bishop 
Newton  on  the  Prophecies,  (pp.  311 — 313,) 
who  explains  it  as  referring  to  the  0th- 
man  empire,  and  to  the  fact  that  though 
the  Turks  have  been  able  to  take  Jerusa- 
lem, they  have  never  been  able  to  subdue 
the  Arabians,  the  Moabites,  or  the  Ammon- 
ites. Aleppo,  Damascus,  and  Gaza,  says 
he,  were  forced  to  submit,  but  these  other 
places  '  escaped  out  of  the  hands'  of  the 
Turks.  As  to  the  other  remark,  (6)  if 
one  writing  after  the  events,  had  intended 
to  give  a  brief  and  striking  view  of  what 
Antiochus  did,  he  could  not  find  better 
language  to  express  it  than  to  say  in  the 
words  of  the  passage  before  us,  '  He  shall 
enter  also  into  the  glorious  land,  and 
many  countries  shall  be  overthrown  ;  but 
these  shaU  escape  out  of  his  band,  even 
40 


Edom,  and  Moab,  and  the  chief  of  the 
children  of  Ammon  fell.'  But  it  is  cleaj 
that  there  is  no  natural  sagacity  by  which 
this  could  be  foreseen.  There  was  no- 
thing in  the  character  of  those  nations,  or 
in  tho  nature  of  the  case,  which  would  lead 
one  to  anticipate  it — for  the  presumption 
would  be,  that  if  a  desolating  war  were 
;  waged  on  Palestine  by  a  cruel  conqueror, 
i  his  ravages  would  be  extended  to  the 
neighbouring  countries  also. 

42.  He  shall  stretch  forth  his  hnnd  also 

]  vpoii    the    countries.     Marg.,   send  forth. 

[  Significant  of  war   and  conquest.     The 

idea  is,  that  he  would  be  an  invader  of 

foreign  lands — a  characteristic  which  it  is 

I  not   necessary   to   show   appertained    to 

'  Antiochus.      ^  And    the   land  of  Egijpt 

'  shall  not  escape.     Moab  and  Edom,  and 

I  the   land  of  Ammon  would   escape,  but 

I  Egypt  would  not.     We  have  seen  in  the 

exposition  of  this  chapter,  (Notes  on  vs, 

25—28,)  that  he,  in  fact,  subdued  Mem- 

'  phis  and  the  best  portions  of  Egypt,  and 

\  even  obtained  possession  of  the  person  of 

the  king. 

[  43.  But  he  shall  have  power  over  the 
\  treasures  of  gold  and  of  silver.  See  Notes 
on  ver.  28.  Having  seized  upon  the  most 
important  places  in  Egypt,  and  having 
possession  of  the  person  of  the  king,  he 
would,  of  course,  have  the  wealth  of 
Egypt  at  his  disposal,  and  would  return 
to  his  land  laden  with  spoils.  ^  And 
over  all  the  precious  things  of  Egypt.  The 
rich  lands;  the  public  buildings;  the 
j  contents  of  the  royal  palace ;  the  works 
I  of  art,  and  the  monuments,  and  books, 
'  and  implements  of  war.  All  these  would, 
of  course,  be  at  the  disposal  of  the  con- 
queror. *{  And  the  Lihifans.  The  word 
Lihyans,  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  is 
everywhere  joined  with  the  Egyptians 
and  Ethiopians.  They  are  supposed  to 
have  been  a  people  of  Egyptian  origin, 
and  their  country  bordered  on  Egypt  in 
the  West.  See  Tanner's  Ancient  Atlas. 
A  conquest  of  Egypt  was  almost  in  itself 
a  conquest  of  Libya.  ^  And  the  Ethiopi. 
ans.  lleh.,  Cushites — S'tb-  On  the  gen- 
eral meaning  of  the  word  Cash  or  Ethio- 


470 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534 


Egypt :  and  dhe  Libyans  and  Ethio- 
pians shall  be  at  his  steps. 

44  But  tidings  out  of  the  east  and 
cut  of  the  north  shall  trouble  him  : 


jna  in  the  Scriptures,  see  Notes  on  Isa. 
xi.  11.  The  reference  here,  undoubt- 
edly, is  to  the  African  Cush  or  Ethiopia, 
•which  bounded  Egypt  on  the  south. 
This  country  comprehended  not  only 
Ethiopia  above  Syene  and  the  Cataracts, 
but  likewise  Thebais  or  Upper  Egypt. 
A  subjugation  of  Egjpt  would  be  in  fact 
almost  a  conquest  of  this  land.  ^  Shall 
be  at  his  steps.  Gesenius  renders  this, 
'in  his  company.'  The  word  means  pro- 
perly step,  or  icalk.  Comp.  Ps.  xxxvii. 
23  ;  Prov.  xx.  24.  The  Vulgate  renders 
this,  'And  he  shall  pass  also  through 
Libya  and  ^Ethiopia.'  The  Gr.,  'And  he 
shall  have  power  over  all  the  secret  trea- 
sures of  gold  and  of  silver,  and  over  all 
the  desirable  things  of  Egypt,  and  of  the 
Libyans,  and  of  the  iEtbiopians,  in  their 
strongholds.'  Lengerke  renders  it,  'And 
the  Libyans  and  Ethiopians  shall  follow 
his  steps.'  The  proper  sense  of  the  He- 
brew would  be,  that  they  aecomiianied 
him  ;  that  they  marched  with  him  or  fol- 
lowed him  ;  and  the  phrase  would  be  ap- 
plicable either  to  those  who  were  allies,  or 
who  were  led  captive.  The  more  proba- 
ble idea  would  be  that  they  were  allies, 
or  were  associated  with  him,  than  that 
they  were  captives.  I  do  not  know  that 
there  are  any  distinct  historical  facts 
which  show  the  truth  of  what  is  here  pre- 
dicted respecting  Antiochus,  but  it  can- 
not be  considered  as  improbable  that  the 
prophecy  was  fulfilled;  for,  (a)  as  already 
observed,  these  nations,  naturally  allied 
to  Egypt,  as  being  a  part  of  the  same 
people,  bounded  Egypt  on  the  west  and 
on  the  south;  {h)  in  the  days  of  Ezekiel 
(Ezek.  XXX.  4,  6),  we  find  that  they  were 
actually  confederated  with  Egypt  in  a 
'  league,'  and  that  the  calamity  which  fell 
upon  Egypt,  also  fell  directly  upon 
Ethiopia  and  Libya;  and  (c)  the  posses- 
sion of  Egypt,  therefore,  would  be  natu- 
rally followed  with  the  subjugation  of  these 
places,  or  it  might  be  presumed  that  they 
would  seek  the  alliance  and  friendship  of 
one  who  had  subdued  it. 

44.  But  tidings  out  of  the  east  and  out 
of  the  north  shall  trouble  him.  Shall  dis- 
turb him,  or  alarm  him.  That  is,  he  will 
%car  something  from  those  quarters  that 


therefore  he  shall  go  forth  with 
great  fury  to  destroy,  and  utterly 
to  make  away  many. 


will  disarrange  all  his  other  plans,  or  that 
will  summon  him  forth  in  his  last  and 
final  expedition — on  that  expedition  in 
which  '  he  will  come  to  his  end'  (ver.  45), 
or  which  will  be  the  end  of  this  series  of 
historical  events.  The  reference  hero 
is  to  the  winding  up  of  this  series  of 
transactions,  and,  according  to  the  view 
taken  on  ver.  40  (see  Notes  on  that  place), 
it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  this 
would  happen  immediately  after  what  ia 
stated  in  ver.  43,  but  it  is  rather  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  statement  of  what  would  oc- 
cur in  the  end,  or  of  the  manner  in  which 
the  person  here  referred  to  would  finally 
come  to  an  end,  or  in  which  these  events 
would  be  closed.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
Antiochus,  as  will  be  seen  in  the  Notes 
on  ver.  45,  was  called  forth  in  a  warliku 
expedition  bj' tidings  or  reports  fromPar- 
thia  and  Armenia — regions  lying  to  the 
east  and  the  north,  and  it  was  in  this  ex- 
pedition that  he  lost  his  life,  and  that  this 
series  of  historical  events  was  closed. 
Lengerke  says,  Antiochus  assembled  an 
army  to  take  vengeance  on  the  Jews,  who, 
after  the  close  of  the  unfortunate  cam- 
paign in  Egypt,  rose  up,  under  the  Mac- 
cabees against  Antiochus.  (1  Mac.  iii. 
10,  seq.).  Then  the  intelligence  that  the 
Parthians  in  the  east,  and  the  Armenians 
in  the  north,  had  armed  themselves  for 
war  agninst  him,  alarmed  him.  So  Ta- 
citus (Hist.  v.  S)  says  [Antiochus  Judteis], 
Deniere  superstitioncm  et  mores  Gra:corum 
adnixus,  quominus  teterrimam  gentem  in 
melius  mutaret,  Parthorum  bello  prohibi- 
tus  est,  nam  ea  tempestate  arsaces  dcfecernt. 
In  the  year  147  13.  C,  Antiochus  went  on 
the  expedition  to  Persia  and  Armenia,  on 
the  return  from  which  he  died.  The  occa- 
sions for  this  were  these :  (a)  Artaxias,  the 
king  of  Armenia,  who  was  his  vassal,  had 
revolted  from  him,  and  (b)  he  sought  to  re- 
plenish his  exhausted  treasures,  that  he 
might  wage  the  war  with  Judas  Macca- 
beus. See  1  Mac.  iii.  27 — 37  ;  Jos.  Ant.  B, 
xii.  ch.  vii.  g  2;  Appian  Syriac.  xlvi.  80, 
Porphyry,  in  Jerome,  in  loc.  ^  There- 
fore shall  he  go  forth  with  great  fury  to 
destroy,  <fec.  Great  fury  at  the  revolt  of 
Artaxias,  and  especially  at  this  juncture 
when  he  was  waging  war  with  the  Jews; 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER  XI. 


471 


45  And  he  shall  plant  the  taber- 
nacles of  his  palaces  between  the 
seas  m  the  ="  glorious  holy  mountain: 


and  great  fury  at  tho  Jews,  with  a 
determination  to  obtain  the  means  ut- 
terly to  destroy  thorn.  1  Mac.  iii.  27 : 
'"  Now  when  king  Antiochus  heard  these 
things  [tlio  successes  of  Judas  Mac- 
cabeus], he  was  full  of  indignation." 
In  every  way  his  wrath  was  kindled. 
He  was  enraged  against  the  Jews  on 
account  of  their  success;  he  was  en- 
raged against  Artaxias  for  revolting 
from  hiui ;  ho  was  enraged  because  his 
treasury  wag  exhausted,  and  he  had  not 
the  means  of  prosecuting  the  war.  In 
this  mood  of  mind  he  crossed  the  Eu- 
phrates (1  Mac.  iii.  37)  to  prosecute  the 
war  in  the  East,  and,  as  it  is  said  here, 
'  utterly  to  make  away  many.'  Every 
thing  conspired  to  kindle  his  fury,  and,  in 
this  state  of  mind,  he  went  forth  on  his 
last  expedition  to  the  east.  Nothing,  in 
fact,  could  better  describe  the  state  of 
mind  of  Antiochus,  than  the  language 
here  used  by  the  angel  to  Daniel. 

45.  And  he  shall  plant  the  tabernacles 
nf  his  palaces.  The  royal  tents  ;  the  mi- 
litary tents  of  himself  and  his  court.  Ori- 
ental princes  when  they  went  forth,  even 
in  war,  marched  in  great  state,  with  a 
large  retinue  of  the  officers  of  their  court, 
and  often  with  their  wives  and  concu- 
bines, and  with  all  the  appliances  of 
luxury.  Comp.  the  account  of  the  inva- 
sion of  Greece  by  Xerxes,  or  of  the  camp 
of  Darius,  as  taken  by  Alexander  the 
Great.  The  militarj'  stations  of  Antio- 
chus, therefore,  in  this  march,  would  be, 
for  tho  time,  the  residence  of  the  court, 
and  would  be  distinguished  for  as  great  a 
degree  of  roj-al  luxury  as  the  circum- 
stances would  allow.  At  the  same  time, 
they  would  consist  of  tabernacles  or  tents, 
as  those  stations  were  not  designed  to  be 
permanent.  The  meaning  is,  that  the 
royal  temporary  residence  in  this  expedi- 
tion, and  previous  to  the  close — the  end 
of  the  whole  matter — that  is,  the  death 
of  Antiochus,  would  be  in  the  mountain 
here  referred  to.  •[  Beticecn  the  seas. — 
That  is,  between  some  seas  in  the  'east,' 
or  '  north' — for  it  was  by  tidings  from  the 
east  and  north  that  he  would  be  disturbed, 
and  summoned  forth,  ver.  44.  AVe  are, 
therefore,  most  naturally  to  look  for  this 


yet  ^  he  shall  come  to  his  end,  and 

none  shall  help  him. 

^OT, goodly,  llcb.mnuntain  nfdelightoj  \ulintsi. 
l'2Th.  2.  8. 

place  in  or.e  of  those  quarters.  The/oci 
was,  that  he  had  two  objects  in  view — tho 
one  was  to  put  down  the  revolt  in  Arme- 
nia; and  tho  other  to  replenish  his  ex- 
hausted treasures  from  Persia.  The  for- 
mer would  be  naturally  that  which  ho 
would  first  endeavour  to  accomplish,  for 
if  ho  suffered  the  revolt  to  proceed,  it 
might  increase  to  such  an  extent  that  it 
would  be  impossible  to  subdue  it.  Be- 
sides, ho  would  not  be  likely  to  go  to  Per- 
sia when  there  was  a  formidable  insur- 
rection in  his  rear,  by  which  he  might  be 
harassed  either  in  Persia,  or  on  his  return. 
It  is  most  probable,  therefore,  that  he 
would  first  quell  the  rebellion  in  Armenia 
on  his  way  to  Persia,  and  that  tho  place 
here  referred  to  where  he  would  pitch  his 
royal  tent,  and  where  he  would  end  his 
days,  would  be  some  mountain  where  he 
would  encamp  before  he  reached  the  con- 
fines of  Persia.  There  have  been  various 
conjectures  as  to  the  place  here  denoted  by 
the  phrase  'between  the  seas,'  and  much 
speculation  has  been  employed  to  deter- 
mine the  precise  location.  Jerome  ren- 
ders it,  'And  he  shall  pitch  his  tent  in 
Aphadno  between  the  seas' — regarding 
the  words  which  our  translators  have  ren- 
dered his  j^alaces — Ji"'2N — as  a  proper 
name  denoting  a  place.  So  the  Greek, 
ctpaSaviZ.  The  S^'riac  renders  it,  'in  a 
plain,  between  the  sea  and  the  mountain.' 
Theodoret  takes  it  for  a  place  near  Jeru- 
salem ;  Jerome  says  it  was  near  Nicopo- 
lis,  which  was  formerly  called  Emraaus, 
where  the  mountainous  parts  of  Judea 
began  to  rise,  and  that  it  lay  between  tho 
Dead  Sea  on  the  east,  and  the  Mediterra- 
nean on  tho  west,  where  he  supposes 
that  Antichrist  will  pitch  his  tent;  Por- 
phyry and  Calmet  place  it  between  tho 
two  rivers,  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates ; 
the  latter  supposing  it  means  'Padan  of 
two  rivers,'  that  is,  some  place  in  Meso- 
potamia; and  Dr.  Goodwin  supposes  that 
the  British  Isles  are  intended,  "  which 
so  eminently  stand  'between  tho  seas.'" 
Prof.  Stuart  understands  this  of  the  Me- 
diterranean Sea,  and  that  the  idea  is  tha* 
the  encampment  of  Antiochus  was  in  some 
situation  between  this  sea  and  Jerusalem, 


472 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534 


mentioned  here  as  '  the  holy  and  beauti- 
ful mountain.'  So  far  as  the  2ihrcise  here 
used — 'between  the  seas' — is  concerned, 
'here  can  bo  no  difficulty.  It  might  be 
.ip;jlied  to  any  place  lying  between  two 
sheets  of  water,  as  the  country  between 
the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Mediterranean  ;  or 
the  Dead  Sea  and  Persian  gulf;  or  the 
Caspian  and  Euxinc  seas;  or  the  Caspian 
sea  and  the  Persian  gulf,  for  there  is 
notliing  in  the  laiiyuaf/e  to  determine  the 
exact  locality.  There  is  no  reason  for 
taking  the  word  aphadiw —  ''J7PN  —  as  a 
proper  name — the  literal  meaning  of  it 
being  tent  or  tabernacle ;  and  the  simple 
idea  in  the  passage  is,  that  the  transac- 
tion here  referred  to — the  event  which 
would  close  this  series,  and  which  would 
constitute  the  '  end'  of  these  affairs,  would 
occur  in  some  mountainous  region  sit- 
uated between  two  seas  or  liodies  of  wa- 
ter. Any  such  j^lace,  so  far  as  the  mean- 
ing of  the  word  is  concerned,  would  cor- 
respond with  this  prophecy.  ^  In  the 
glorious  holy  jnountain.  That  is,  this 
■would  occur  (a)  in  a  mountain,  or  in  a 
mountainous  region  ;  and  (6)  it  would  be 
a  mountain  to  which  the  appellation  here 
used — '  glorious  holy' — would  be  properly 
given.  The  most  obvious  application  of 
this  phrase,  it  cannot  be  doubted,  would 
be  Jerusalem,  as  being 'the  holy  moun- 
tain,' or  'the  mountain  of  holiness,'  and 
as  the  place  which  the  word  '  glorious' — 
^Ti — would  most  naturally  suggest. — 
Comp.  vs.  16,  41.  Bertholdt  and  Dereser 
propose  a  change  in  the  text  here,  and 
understand  it  as  signifj-ing  that '  he  would 
pitch  his  tent  between  a  sea  and  a  moun- 
tain, and  would  seize  upon  a  temple  (t^'l^p) 
there.'  But  there  is  no  authority  for  so 
changing  the  text.  Rosenmiiller,  whom 
Lengcrke  fuUows,  renders  it,  '  between 
some  sea  and  the  glorious  holy  mountain  ;' 
Lengerke  supposes  that  the  meaning  is, 
that  Antiochus,  on  his  return  from  Egypt, 
and  before  he  went  to  Persia,  'pitched 
his  tents  in  that  region,  somewhere  along 
the  coasts  of  the  Mediterranean,  for  the 
purpose  of  chastising  the  Jews,'  and  that 
this  is  the  reference  hero.  But  this,  as 
well  as  the  proposed  rending  of  Dereser 
and  Bertholdt,  is  a  forced  interpretation. 
Gesenius  (icx.)  supposes  that  the  phrase 
means,  'mount  of  holy  beauty,'  i.  e.  iSIount 
Sion.  There  are  some  things  which  are 
•lear,  and  which  the  honest  principles  of 
jttterpretation    demand   in  this  passage, 


I  such  as  the  following  :  (a)  what  is  hor« 
I  stated  was  to  occur  after  the  rumour  from 
the  east  and  the  north  (ver.  44)  should 
call  forth  the  person  here  referred  to  on 
this  expedition;  {b)  it  would  not  be  long 
before  his  'end, — before  the  close  of  the 
series,  and  would  be  connected  with  that; 
or  would  be  the  place  where  that  would 
occur  ;  (c)  it  would  be  on  some  moun- 
tainous region,  to  which  the  appellation 
'glorious  holy' might  with  propriety  be 
,  applied.  The  only  question  of  difficulty 
is,  whether  it  is  necessary  to  interpret 
this  of  Jerusalem,  or  whether  it  may 
be  applied  to  some  other  mountainous 
region  where  it  may  be  supposed  An- 
tiochus '  pitched  his  tents'  on  his  last  ex- 
pedition to  the  East,  and  near  the  close 
I  of  his  life.  Jerome  renders  this,  Super 
\inontem  inchjtum  ct  sanctutn ;  the  Greek, 
I '  on  the  holy  mountain  Sabcein' — aa/Sac'ii'. 
j  Tho  Syriac,  'in  a  plain,  between  a  sea 
!  and  a  mountain,  and  shall  preserve  his 
!  sanctuary.'  Tho  literal  meaning  of  the 
I  passage  may  be  thus  expressed,  '  on  a 
'  mountiiin  of  beauty  that  is  holy  or  sacred.' 
The  essential  things  are,  (a)  that  it  would 
be  on  a  mountain,  or  in  a  mountainous 
region;  (t)  that  this  mountain  would  be 
celebrated  or  distinguished  for  beauty — 
Oj — that  is,  for  the  beauty  of  its  situa- 
tion, or  the  beauty  of  its  scenery,  or  the 
beauty  of  its  structures — or  that  it  should 
be  rec/ardcd  as  beautiful ;  (c)  that  it  would 
be  held  as  sacred  or  holy — 'c:'\p — that  is, 
as  sacred  to  religion,  or  regarded  as  a 
holy  place,  or  a  place  of  worship.  Now 
it  is  true  that  this  language  mi<jht  be  ap- 
plied to  Mount  Sion,  for  that  was  a  moun- 
tain; it  was  distinguished  for  beauty,  or 
was  so  regarded  by  those  who  dwelt  there 
(Comp.  Ps.  xlviii.  2) ;  and  it  was  holy,  as 
being  the  place  where  the  worship  of  God 
was  celebrated.  But  it  is  also  true,  that, 
so  far  as  the  language  is  concerned,  it 
might  be  applied  to  any  other  mountain 
or  mountainous  region  that  was  distin- 
guished for  beauty,  and  that  was  regarded 
as  sacred  or  in  any  way  consecrated  to 
religion.  I  see  no  objection,  therefore,  to 
the  supposition  that  this  may  be  under- 
stood of  some  mountain  or  elevated  spot 
which  was  held  as  sacred  to  religion,  or 
where  a  temple  was  retired  for  worship, 
and  hence  it  may  have  referred  to  some 
mountain,  in  the  vicinity  of  some  temple 
dedicated  to  idol  worship,  where  Antio- 
;  chus  would  pitch  his  tent  for   the   pur 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER  XI. 


473 


poso  of  rapine  and  plunder,  f  Yet  he  | 
shall  r.ome  to  his  end.  Evidently  in  i 
the  expedition  referred  to,  and  iu  the 
vicinity  referred  to.  Though  ho  had  gone  ! 
full  of  wrath  ;  and  though  he  was  pre- 
paring to  wreak  his  vengeance  on  the 
people  of  God;  and  though  he  had  every 
prospect  of  success  in  the  enterprise,  yet 
he  would  come  to  an  end  there,  or  would 
die.  This  would  be  the  end  of  his  career, 
and  would  be  at  the  same  time  the  end  of 
that  series  of  calamities  that  the  .angel  pre- 
dicted. The  assurance  is  more  than  once 
given  (vs.  27,  ^5,)  that  there  was  an  'ap- 
pointed' time  during  which  these  troubles 
would  continue,  or  that  there  would  be 
an  'end'  of  them  at  the  appointed  time, 
and  the  design  was,  that  when  these  in- 
flictions came  upon  the  Jews  they  should 
be  permitted  to  comfort  themselves  with 
the  assurance  that  they  would  have  a  ter- 
mination ;  that  is,  that  the  institutions  of 
religion  in  their  land  would  not  be  utterly 
overthrown.  \  And  none  shall  help  him. 
None  shall  save  his  life  ;  none  shall  res- 
cue him  out  of  his  danger.  That  is,  he 
would  certainly  die,  and  his  plans  of  evil 
would  thus  be  brought  to  a  close. 

The  question  now  is,  whether  this  can 
be  applied  to  the  closing  scenes  in  the  life 
of  Antiochus  Epiplianes.  The  materials 
for  writing  the  life  of  Antiochus  are  in- 
deed scanty,  but  there  is  little  doubt  as 
to  the  place  and  manner  of  his  death. 
According  to  all  the  accounts,  he  received 
intelligence  of  the  success  of  the  Jewish 
arras  under  Judas  Maccabeus,  and  the 
overthrow  of  the  Syrians,  at  Elymais  or 
Persepolis  (2  Mae.  ix.  2^,  in  Persia,  and 
ns  he  was  detained  there  by  an  insurrec- 
tion of  the  people,  occasioned  by  his  rob- 
bing the  celebrated  temple  of  Diana  (Jos. 
Ant.  E.  xii.  ch.  ix.  §  1,)  in  which  his 
father,  Antiochus  the  Great,  lost  his  life, 
his  vexation  was  almost  beyond  endu- 
rance. He  set  out  on  his  return  with  a 
determination  to  make  every  possible 
effort  to  exterminate  the  Jews ;  but  du- 
ring his  journey  ho  was  attacked  by  a 
disease,  in  which  he  suffered  excessive 
pain,  and  was  tormented  bj-  the  bitterest 
anguish  of  conscience,  on  account  of  his 
sacrilege  and  other  crimes.  He  finally 
died  at  Taba;  in  Parataccne,  on  the  fron- 
tiers of  Persia  and  Babylon,  in  the  year 
i03  B.  C,  after  a  reign  of  eleven  years. 
See  the  account  of  his  wretched  death  iu 
2  Mae.  ix;  Jos.  Ant.  B.  xii.  ch.  ix.  §  1., 
Prideaux,  Con.  III.  pp.  272,  273;  Po- 
40  » 


lybius  in  Exeerpta  Yalesii  de  Virtntibut 
et  Vifiis,  ssxi.,  and  Appian,  Syriac.  xlvi. 
80.     Now  this    account  agrees    substan- 
tially with  the  prediction  in  the  passage 
before   us    in    the   following   respects: — 
(a)  The  circumstances  which  called  him 
forth.      It  was   on  account   of  'tidings' 
or  rumors  out  of  the  east  and  north  that 
he  went  on  this  last  expedition.     (fi)The 
place    specified  where    the   last    scenes 
would   occur,   'between  the  seas.'     Any 
one  has  only  to  look  on  a  map  of  the 
Eastern  hemisphere,  to  see  that  the  an- 
cient  Persepolis,   the  capital  of  Persia, 
where  the  rumour  of  the   success  of  the 
Jews  reached  him  which  induced  him  to 
return,   is   'between  the  seas' — the  Cas- 
pian   sea   and    the    Persian    gulf,    lying 
not  far  from  midway   between  the  two. 
(e)  The    'glorious  holy  mountain,' or  as 
the  interpretation  above  proposed  would 
]  render  it,    '  the  mountain  of  beauty,'  sa- 
i  cred  to  religion,  or  to  worship.     (1)  The 
I  whole  region  was  mountainous.     (2)  It  is 
not  unlikely  that  a  temple  would  be  raised 
I  on  a  mountain  or  elevated  place,  for  this 
I  was  the  almost  univers.al  custom  among 
I  the  ancients,  and  it  may  be  assumed  as 
not  improbable  that  the  temple  of  Diana 
at  Elymais,  or  Persepolis,  which  Antiochus 
robbed,  and  where  he  'pitched  his  tent/ 
was   on   such  a  place.     (3)  Such  a  place 
i  would  be  regarded  as   '  holy,'  and  would 
j  be  spoken  of    as  'an  ornament,'     or  as 
I  beautiful,  for  this  was  the  language  which 
the  Hebrews  were  accustomed  to  apply 
to  a  place  of  worship.     I  suppose,  there- 
'  fore,   that  the  reference  is    here  to   tho 
closing  scene    in  the   life  of  Antiochus, 
'and   that  the  account  in    the   prophecy 
agrees  in  a  most  striking  manner  with  tho 
facts  of  history,  and  consequently  that  it 
I  is   not   necessary   to   look   to  any  other 
I  events   for   a  fulfilment,    or   to   suppose 
that  it  has  any  secondary  and  ultimate 
reference  to  what  would  occur  in  far  dis- 
tant years. 

In  view  of  this  exposition,  we  may  see 
the  force  of  the  opinion  maintained  by 
Porphyr}',  that  this  portion  of  the  Book 
of  Daniel  must  h.tve  been  written  a/ler 
the  events  occurred.  Ho  could  not  but 
see,  as  any  one  can  now,  the  surprising 
accuracy  of  the  statements  of  the  chapter, 
and  their  applicability  to  the  events  of 
history  as  thej'  had  actually  occurred, 
even  seeing  this,  there  was  but  one  of  two 
courses  to  be  taken — either  to  admit  the 
inspiration  of  the  Book,  or  to  maintain 


474 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  534 


that  it  iras  written  after  the  events.  Ho 
chose  the  latter  nlternative  ;  and  so  far  as 
c;in  be  judged  from  the  few  fragments 
which  we  have  of  his  work  in  the  com- 
mentary of  Jerome  on  this  Booli,  he  did 
it  solely  on  the  ground  of  the  accuracy 
of  the  doseriiition.  He  referred  to  no  ex- 
ternal evidence  ;  he  adduced  no  historical 
proofs  that  the  hook  was  written  subse- 
quent to  the  events ;  but  he  maintained 
simply  that  an  account  so  minute  and  ex- 
act could  not  have  been  written  before 
the  events,  and  that  the  very  accuracy  of 
the  alleged  predictions,  and  their  entire 
agreement  with  the  history,  was  full 
demonstration  that  they  were  written 
after.  The  testimony  of  Porphyry,  there- 
fore, may  be  allowed  to  be  a  suf&cient 
proof  of  the  correspondence  of  this  por- 


tion of  the  Book  of  Daniel  with  the  fact£ 
of  history;  and  if  the  book  was  written 
before  the  age  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
the  evidence  is  clear  of  its  inspiration,  for 
no  man  will  seriously  maintain  that  these 
historic  events  could  be  drawn  out  with 
so  much  particularity  of  detail  by  any 
natural  skill  three  hundred  and  seventy 
years  before  they  occurred,  as  must  have 
been  the  case  if  written  by  Daniel.  Hu- 
man sagacity  does  not  extend  its  vision 
thus  far  into  the  future  with  the  power 
of  foretelling  the  fates  of  kingdoms,  and 
giving  in  detail  the  lives  and  fortunes  of 
individual  men.  Either  the  infidel  must 
dispose  of  the  testimony  that  Daniel 
lived  and  wrote  at  the  time  alleged,  or, 
as  an  honest  man,  he  should  admit  that 
he  was  inspired. 


CHAPTER  XII. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  CHAPTER. 


There  are  several  general  remarks  which  may  be  made  respecting  this,  the  closing  chapter 
of  the  book  of  Daniel. 

I.  It  is  a  part,  or  a  continuation  of  the  general  prophecy  or  vision  which  was  commenced  in 
cli.  X.,  and  whicli  embraces  the  whole  of  the  eleventli  chapter.  Except  for  tlie  length  of  the  pro- 
phecy there  should  have  been  no  division  whatever,  and  it  should  be  re.id  as  a  continuous 
whole;  or  if  a  division  were  desirable,  that  which  was  made  bj'  Cardinal  Hugo  iu  the  13th 
century,  and  which  occurs  in  our  translation  of  the  Bible,  is  one  of  the  most  unhapp}'.  On  every 
account,  and  for  every  reason,  the  division  should  have  been  at  the  close  of  the  fourth  verse  of 
this  chapter,  and  the  first  four  verses  should  have  been  attached  to  the  previous  portion.  That 
the  beginning  of  this  chapter  is  a  continuation  of  the  address  of  the  angel  to  Daniel,  is  plain 
from  a  mere  glance.  The  address  ends  at  ver  4;  and  then  commences  a  colloquy  between  two 
angels  who  appear  in  the  vision,  designed  to  cast  farther  light  on  what  had  been  said.  It  will 
contribute  to  a  right  understanding  of  this  chapter  to  remember  that  it  is  a  part  of  the  one  vi- 
sion or  prophecy  which  was  commenced  iu  chapter  x.,  and  that  the  whole  three  chapters  (x.  xi. 
xii.)  should  be  read  together.  If  chapter  xi..  therefore,  refers  to  the  historical  events  connected 
with  the  reign  of  Antiochus,  and  th(;  troubles  under  him,  it  would  seem  to  be  plain  that  this 
does  also,  and  that  the  angel  meant  to  designate  the  time  when  these  troubles  would  close,  and 
the  indications  by  which  it  might  be  known  that  they  were  about  to  come  to  an  end. 

II.  At  the  same  time  that  this  is  true,  it  must  also  be  admitted  that  the  language  which  is 
used  is  such  as  is  applicable  to  other  events,  and  that  it  supposed  that  there  was  a  belief  iu  the 
doctrines  to  which  that  language  would  be  naturally  applied.  It  is  not  such  language  as  would 
have  been  originally  employed  to  describe  the  historical  transactions  respecting  the  persecutions 
under  Antiochus,  nor  unles.s  the  doctrines  which  are  obviously  conveyed  by  that  language  were 
understood  and  believed.  I  refer  here  to  the  statements  respecting  the  resurrection  of  the  dead 
and  of  the  future  .state.  This  language  is  found  particularly  in  vs.  2,  3  :  "  And  many  of  them 
that  sleep  iu  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall  awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame  and 
everlasting  contempt.  And  they  that  be  wise  shall  shine  as  the  brightness  of  the  firmament ; 
and  they  that  turn  many  to  righteousness  as  the  stars  forever  and  ever."  This  language  is  ap- 
propriate to  express  such  doctrine  as  the  following :  (';)  that  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead — or 
a  being  raised  up  out  of  the  dust  of  the  earth  ;  {l>)  that  of  retribution  after  the  resurrection :  a 
pa'*  being  rai.sed  to  everlasting  life, ^nd  a  part  to  everlasting  shame;  (c)  that  of  the  eternity  of 
future  retribution,  or  the  eternity  of  rewards  and  punishments  :  awaking  to  everlasting  life,  and 
to  everlasting  shame;  (d)  that  of  the  high  honours  and  rewards  of  those  who  would  be  engaged 
indjing  good,  or  of  that  portion  of  mankind  who  would  be  instrumental  in  turning  the  wicked 
from  the  paths  of  sin :  '  they  that  turn  many  to  righteousness,  as  the  stars  forever  and  ever.' 
Tt  is  impogsible  to  conceive  that  this  language  would  have  been  used  unless  these  doctrines  wert 


B.C.534.]  CHAPTER   XII.  475 

known  and  believed,  and  unless  it  be  supposed  that  thoy  were  so  familiar  that  it  would  be  readily 
understood.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  particular  thing  to  which  it  was  applied  by  the 
angel,  it  is  such  language  as  could  ha-'e  been  intelligible  only  where  there  was  a  belief  of  these 
doctrines,  and  it  may,  therefore,  be  iH.'t  down  aa  au  indication  of  a  prevalent  belief  in  the  time 
of  Daniel  on  these  subjects.  Such  would  be  understood  now  if  the  same  language  were  used  by  us, 
to  whatever  we  might  apply  it,  for  it  would  not  be  employed  unless  there  was  a  belief  of  th« 
truth  of  the  doctrines  which  it  is  naturally  adapted  to  convey. 

III.  If  the  angel  intended,  therefore,  primarily  to  refer  to  events  that  would  occur  in  the  tlm« 
of  Antiochus — to  the  arousing  of  many  to  defend  their  country,  as  if  called  from  the  dust  of  the 
earth,  or  to  their  being  summoned  by  Judas  Maccabeus  from  caves  and  fastnesses,  and  to  the 
honour  to  which  many  of  them  might  be  raised,  and  the  shame  and  contempt  which  would 
await  others,  it  seems  difficult  to  doubt  that  the  mind  of  the  speaker,  at  the  same  time,  glanced 
onward  to  higher  doctrines,  and  that  it  was  the  intention  of  the  angel  to  bring  into  view  far 
distant  events,  of  which  these  occurrences  might  be  regarded  as  an  emblem,  and  that  he  meant 
to  advert  to  what  would  literally  occur  in  the  time  of  the  Maccabees  as  a  beautiful  and  striking 
illustratiou  of  more  momentous  and  glorious  scenes  when  the  earth  should  give  up  its  dead, 
and  when  the  final  judgment  should  occur.  On  these  scenes,  perhaps,  the  mind  of  the  angel 
ultimately  rested,  and  a  prominent  part  of  the  design  of  the  entire  vision  may  have  been  to 
bring  them  into  view,  and  to  direct  the  thoughts  of  the  pious  onward  tar  beyond  the  troubles  and 
the  triumphs  in  the  days  of  the  Maccabees,  to  the  time  when  the  dead  should  arise,  and  when 
the  retributions  of  eternity  should  occur.  It  was  no  uncommon  thing  among  the  prophets  to 
allow  the  eye  to  glance  from  one  olyect  to  another  lying  in  the  same  range  of  vision,  or  having 
such  points  of  resemblance  that  the  one  would  suggest  the  other ;  and  it  often  happened  that  a 
description  which  commenced  with  some  natural  event  terminated  in  some  more  important 
spiritual  truth  to  which  that  event  had  a  resemblance,  and  which  it  was  adapted  to  suggest. 
Comp.  Intro,  to  Isaiah,  §7,  III.  (3)  (4)  (5).  Three  things  occur  often  in  such  a  case:  (1)  lan- 
guage is  employed  in  speaking  of  what  is  to  take  place,  which  is  derived  from  the  secondary  and 
remote  event,  and  which  naturally  suggests  that;  (2)  ideas  are  intermingled  in  the  description 
which  are  appropriate  to  the  secondary  event  only,  and  which  should  be  understood  as  appli- 
cable to  that;  and  (3)  the  description  which  was  commenced  \y\th  reference  to  one  event  or  class 
of  events,  often  passes  over  entirely  and  terminates  on  the  secondary  and  ultimate  events.  This 
point  will  be  more  particularly  examined  in  the  Notes  on  the  chapter. 

IV.  The  contents  of  the  chapter  are  as  follows: 

(1)  The  concluding  statement  of  what  would  occur  at  the  time  referred  to  in  the  previous 
chapter,  vs.  1 — 3.  This  statement  embraces  many  particulars:  that  Michael,  the  guardian  an- 
gel, would  stand  up  iu  behalf  of  the  people;  that  there  would  be  great  trouble,  such  as  there 
had  not  been  since  the  time  when  the  nation  began  to  exist ;  that  there  would  be  deliverance 
for  all  whose  names  were  recorded  in  the  book ;  that  there  would  bo  an  awakening  of  those  who 
slept  in  the  dust — some  coming  to  life  and  honour,  and  some  to  shame  and  dishonour,  and  that 
distinguished  glory  would  await  those  who  turned  many  to  righteousness. 

(2)  At  this  stage  of  the  matter,  all  having  been  disclosed  that  the  angel  purposed  to  reveal, 
Daniel  is  commanded  to  shut  and  seal  the  book ;  yet  with  the  encouragement  held  out  that 
more  would  yet  be  known  on  the  subject,  ver.  3.  The  matter  was  evidently  involved  still  iu 
myster}-,  and  there  were  many  points  on  which  it  could  not  but  be  desired  that  there  should  be 
fuller  information — points  relating  to  the  time  when  these  things  would  happen,  and  a  more 
particular  account  of  the  full  meaning  of  what  had  been  predicted,  &,c.  On  these  points  it  is 
clear  that  many  questions  might  be  asked,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  mind  of  Daniel  would  bo 
left  still  in  perplexity  in  regard  to  them.  To  meet  this  state  of  mind,  the  angel  says  to  Daniel 
that  '  many  would  run  to  and  fro,  and  that  knowledge  would  be  increased ;'  that  is,  that  by  in- 
tercourse with  one  another  in  future  times;  by  spreading  abroad  the  knowledge  already  ob- 
tained ;  by  diffusing  information,  and  by  careful  inquiry,  those  of  coming  ages  would  obtain 
much  clearer  views  on  these  points:  or,  in  other  words,  that  time,  and  the  intercourse  of  indi- 
viduals and  nations,  would  clear  up  the  obscurities  of  prophecy. 

0)  In  this  state  of  perplexity,  Daniel  looked  and  saw  two  other  personages  standing  on  the 
two  sides  of  the  river,  and  between  them  and  the  angel  who  had  conversed  with  Daniel,  a  col- 
loquy or  conversation  ensues,  respecting  the  time  necessary  to  accomplish  these  things,  vs. 
5 — 7.  They  are  introduced  as  interested  in  the  inquiry  as  to  the  time  of  the  continuance  of 
these  things — that  is,  how  long  it  would  be  to  the  end  of  these  wonders  if  These  were  evidently 
angels  also,  and  they  are  represented  (a)  as  ignorant  of  the  future — a  circumstance  which  wo 
must  suppose  to  exist  among  the  angels  ;  and  (b)  as  feeling  a  deep  interest  in  the  transactions 
which  were  to  occur,  and  the  iieriod  when  it  might  be  expected  they  would  have  their  comple- 
tion. To  this  natural  inquiry  the  angel  who  had  conversed  with  Daniel  gives  a  solemn  answer 
(ver.  7),  that  the  period  would  be  'a  time,  and  times,  and  an  half;'  and  that  all  these  things 
would  be  accomplished  when  he  to  whom  reference  was  made  had  finished  his  purpose  of  scat- 
tering the  holy  people. 

(4)  Daniel,  perplexed  and  overwhelmed  with  these  strange  predictions,  hearing  what  was  said 
about  the  time,  but  not  understanding  it,  asks  with  intense  interest  when  the  end  of  these 
things  should  be,  vs.  8 — 13.  He  had  heard  the  reply  of  the  angel,  but  it  conveyed  no  idea  to  his 
mind.  He  was  deeply  solicitous  to  look  into  the  future,  and  to  ascertain  w/ien  these  events 
would  end,  and  what  would  be  their  termination.  The  answer  to  his  anxious,  earnest  inquirj-, 
IS  contained  in  vs.  9 — 13,  and  embraces  several  points — giving  some  further  information,  but 
etill  evidently  designed  to  leave  the  matter  obscure  in  many  respects:  (a)  The  matter  was 


476 


DANIEL. 


[li.  C.  534 


Boaled  up,  and  bis  question  i-oulil  not.  be  definitely  answered,  vcr.  9.  AThcn  the  time  of  the  end 
Fhould  &jmo,  it  is  implied  the  matter  would  be  clearer,  and  might  be  understood,  but  that  ail 
had  been  communicated  substantially  that  could  bo.  (,!i)  A  stiitem"nt  is  made  (vcr.  10)  of  the 
general  lesult  of  the  trials  oa  two  chifses  of  persons :  the  things  that  would  occur  v.'ould  tend 
to  make  the  righteous  more  holy,  but  the  wicked  would  continue  to  do  wickedly,  uotwithstand- 
in,-;  :ill  these  heavy  judgments.  The  latter  too  would,  when  these  events  took  place,  fail  to  un- 
derstand their  design;  but  the  former  would  obtain  a  just  view  of  them,  and  would  be  made 
wiser  by  them.  Time,  to  the  one  class,  would  disclose  the  meaning  of  the  divine  dealings,  and 
they  would  comprehend  them;  to  the  other  they  would  still  be  dark  and  unintelligible,  (c)  A 
statement  is,  however,  made  as  to  the  time  when  these  things  would  be  accomplished,  but  still  so 
obscure  as  to  induce  tlie  ang(d  himself  to  say  to  Daniel  that  he  must  go  his  way  till  the  end 
should  be,  vs.  11 — 13.  Two  periods  of  time  are  mentioned,  both  different  from  the  one  in  ver. 
10.  In  one  of  them  (ver.  11),  it  is  said  that  from  the  time  when  the  daily  sacritice  should  be 
taken  av.-ay,  and  tlie  abomination  that  maketh  desolate  should  be  set  up,  would  be  a  thousand 
two  lumdred  and  ninety  days.  In  the  other  (ver.  1^),  it  is  said  that  he  would  be  blessed  or 
liappy  who  should  reach  a  certain  period  mentioned — a  thousand  three  hundred  and  thirty-fivo 
days.  Vhat  these  different  periods  of  time  refers  to,  will  ofcour.se  be  the  subject  of  inquiry  in 
the  Notes  on  the  chapter,  (d)  The  whole  closes,  therefore  (ver.  13),  with  a  direction  to  Daniel, 
that,  for  the  present,  he  should  go  his  way.  Kothiug  additional  would  be  disclosed.  Time 
would  reveal  more;  time  would  explain  all.  Meantime  tlicre  is  an  assurance  given  that,  as  for 
himself,  he  would  have  '  rest,'  and  v.'ould  '  stand  in  his  lot  at  the  end  of  the  days.'  This  seems 
to  be  a  gracious  assurance  to  him  that  he  had  nothing  to  fear  from  the.se  troubles  personally, 
and  that  whatever  should  come,  he  would  liave  peace,  and  would  occupy  the  position  in  fu- 
ture times  which  was  due  to  him.  His  lot  would  be  happy  and  peaceful;  his  name  would  be 
honoured;  his  salvation  would  be  secured.  It  seems  to  be  implied  that,  with  this  pletlgc,  ho 
ought  to  allow  his  mind  to  be  calm,  and  not  suffer  himself  to  be  distressed  because  he  could 
not  penetrate  the  futur.?,  and  foresee  all  that  was  to  occur;  and  the  truth,  therefore,  with  which 
the  book  closes  is,  that,  having  security  about  our  own  personal  salvation — or  having  no  ground 
of  solicitude  respecting  that — or  h.aving  that  matter  made  safe — we  should  calmly  commit  all 
events  to  God,  with  the  firm  conviction  that  in  his  own  time  his  purposes  will  be  accomplished, 
and  that,  being  then  understood,  he  will  be  seen  to  be  worthy  of  contidence  and  praise. 


1  And  at  that  time  shall  Michael j pie:  band  there  shall  be  a  time  of 
«  stand  up,  the  great  prince  which  trouble,  such  as  never  was  since 
siandeth  for  the  children  of  thy  peo- 


'  c.  10.  13,  21 ;  Jude  9. 


1.  And  at  that  time.  At  the  period  re- 
ferred to  in  the  preceding  chapter.  The 
fair  construction  of  the  passage  demands 
this  interpretation,  and  if  that  refers  to 
Antioehus  Epiphanes,  then  what  is  here 
said  must  also  ;  and  we  are  to  look  for  the 
direct  and  immediate  fulfihnent  of  this 
prediction  in  something  that  occurred 
under  liim,  however  it  may  be  sup- 
posed to  have  an  ultimate  reference  | 
toother  and  more  remote  events.  The  I 
phrase  'at  that  tiiue,'  however,  does 
not  limit  what  is  here  said  to  any  one 
part  of  his  life,  or  to  his  death,  but  to  the 
general  period  referred  to  in  the  time  of  i 
his  reign.  That  reign  was  but  eleven; 
years,  and  the  fulfilment  must  be  found  i 
somewhere  during  that  period.  ^\  S/ia/l' 
Michael.  On  the  meaning  of  this  word,  | 
and  the  being  here  referred  to,  see  Notes' 
on  ch.  X.  lo.  *^  Stuiid  vp.  That  is,  hcj 
shall  interpose;  he  shall  come  forth  to 
render  aid.  This  does  not  mean  neces-i 
sarily  that  he  would  visibly  appear,  but 
that  he  would  in  fact  interpose.  In  thej 
xime  of  great  distress  and  trouble,  there  | 


there  was  a  nation  even  to  that  same 

^  Matt.  2i.  21. 


would  be  supernatural  or  angelic  aid  ren- 
dered to  the  people  of  God.  Ko  man  can 
prove  that  this  would  not  be  so,  nor  is 
tiiere  any  inherent  improbability  in  the 
supposition  that  good  angels  may  be  em- 
ployed to  render  assistance  in  the  time 
of  trouble.  Comp.  Notes  on  ch.  x.  13. 
\  The  fjrcat  prince  uliich  standeth  for  the 
children  of  thrj  peopAe.  See  Notes  as 
above  on  ch.  x.  13.  The  meaning  is,  that 
he  had  the  affairs  of  the  Hebrew  people, 
or  the  people  of  God,  especially  under  his 
protection,  or  he  was  appointed  to  watch 
over  them.  This  doctrine  is  in  accord- 
ance with  the  notions  that  prevailed  at 
that  time;  and  no  one  can  demonstrate 
that  it  is  not  true.  There  is  no  authority 
for  applying  this  to  the  Messiah,  as  many 
have  done,  for  the  term  Michael  is  not 
elsewhere  given  to  him,  and  all  that  the 
language  fairly  conveys  is  met  by  the 
other  supposition.  The  simple  meaning 
is,  that  ho  who  was  the  guardian  angel 
of  that  nation,  or  who  was  appointed  tc 
watch  over  its  interests  would  at  that 
time  of  great  trouble  interpose  and  rcndet 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER    XII. 


477 


timo  :  and  at  that  time  » tliy  people 
shall   bo  delivered,   every   one  that 

'Je.  oO.  7;  Ro.  11.  20. 

aid.  ^  And  there  shall  be  a  time  of  trouble. 
Under  Antiochu.s  Epiphanes.  See  Notes 
on  cli.  xi,  21 — 45.  Comp.  the  I3ooks  of 
the  Mace.'ibees,  passim.  *f  Such  as  never 
was  since  there  was  a  nation  even  to  that 
tame  time.  This  mi(jht  be  construed  with 
reference  to  the  Jewish  niition,  as  mean- 
ing that  the  trouble  would  bo  greater 
than  any  that  had  occurred  during  its 
history.  But  it  m.ay  also  be  taken,  as 
our  translators  understand  it,  in  a  more 
general  sense,  as  referring  to  any  or  all 
nations.  In  either  sense  it  can  hardly  be 
considered  as  the  language  of  hyperbole. 
The  troubles  that  cauic  upon  the  land 
uudcr  the  persecutions  of  Antiochus,  pro- 
bably sui  passed  any  that  the  Hebrew  na- 
tion ever  experienced,  nor  could  it  be 
shown  that,  fur  the  same  period  of  time, 
they  were  surpassed  among  any  other 
people.  The  Saviour  has  employed  this 
language  as  adapted  to  express  the  inten- 
sity of  the  trials  which  would  be  brought 
upon  the  Jews  by  the  Romans  (Matt. 
xxiv.  21),  but  he  does  not  say  that  as 
used  in  D.aniel  it  had  reference  originally 
to  that  event.  It  was  language  appro- 
priate to  express  the  thought  which  he 
wished  to  convey,  and  he,  therefore,  so 
employed  it.  *[  And  at  that  time.  When 
these  troubles  are  at  their  height.  ^  Thy 
people  shall  be  dclircred.  To  wit,  by  the 
valour  and  virtues  of  the  Maccabees.  See 
the  accounts  in  the  Books  of  the  Jlacca- 
bees.  Comp.  Prideaux,  Con.  III.  257, 
seq.  ^  Erery  one  that  shall  be  found  writ- 
te.n  111  the  book.  AVhoso  names  are  en- 
rolled; that  is,  enrolled  as  among  the 
living.  The  idea  is,  that  a  register  was 
made  of  the  names  of  those  who  were  to 
be  spared,  to  wit,  by  God,  or  by  the  an- 
gel, and  that  all  whose  names  were  so  re- 
corded would  bo  preserved.  Those  not 
so  enrolled  would  be  cut  off  under  the 
persecutions  of  Antiochus.  The  language 
here  does  not  refer  to  the  book  of  eternal 
life  or  salvation,  nor  is  it  implied  that 
they  who  would  thus  be  preserved  would 
necessarily  be  saved,  but  to  their  preser- 
Tation  from  death  and  persei.ition,  as  if 
their  names  were  recorded  in  a  book,  or 
were  enrolled.  We  frequently  meet  with 
similar  ideas  in  the  Scriptures.  The  idea 
is,  of  course,   poetical,  but  it  expresses 


shall  bo  found  written  ''in  the  book. 
2  And  many  of  them  that  sleep  in 
T.c.  13.8. 


with  suflacient  clearness  the  thought  that 
there  was  a  divine  purpose  in  regard  to 
them,  and  that  there  was  a  definite  num- 
ber whom  God  designed  to  keep  alive, 
and  that  those  would  be  delivered  from 
those  troubles  while  many  others  would 
be  cut  off.     Comp.  Notes  on  ch.  x.  21. 

2.  And  many  of  them.  The  natural  and 
obvious  meaning  of  the  word  many  here — 
DOT — is  that  a  large  portion  of  the  per- 
sons referred  to  would  thus  awake,  but 
not  all.  So  we  .should  understand  it  if 
applied  to  other  things,  as  in  such  ex- 
pressions as  these — '  many  of  the  people,' 
'  many  of  the  houses  in  a  city,'  '  many  of 
the  trees  in  a  forest,'  '  many  of  the  rivers 
in  a  country,'  <tc.  In  the  Scriptures, 
however,  it  is  undeniable  that  tho  word 
is  sometimes  used  to  denote  tho  whole 
considered  as  constituted  of  many,  as  in 
Rom.  V.  ]5,  16,  19.  In  these  passages  no 
one  can  well  doubt  that  the  word  many  is 
used  to  denote  all,  considered  as  com- 
posed of  tho  *  many'  that  make  up  the  hu- 
man race,  or  tho  '  many'  oflences  that  man 
has  committed.  So  if  it  were  to  be  used 
respecting  those  who  were  to  come  forth 
from  tho  caves  and  fastnesses  where  they 
had  been  driven  by  persecution,  or  those 
who  sleep  in  their  graves,  and  who  come 
forth  in  .a  general  resurrection,  it  viiijht  be 
used  of  them  considered  as  the  many,  and 
it  might  bo  said  '  the  many'  or  *  the  mul- 
titude' comes  forth.  Not  a  few  interpre- 
ters, therefore,  have  understood  this  in 
tho  sense  of  all,  considered  as  referring  to 
a  multitude,  or  as  suggesting  the  idea  of 
a  multitude,  or  keeping  up  the  idea  that 
there  would  bo  great  numbers.  If  this  is 
tho  proper  interpretation,  the  word  'many' 
was  used  instead  of  the  word  '  all,'  to  sug- 
gest to  the  mind  the  idea  that  there  would 
be  a  multitude,  or  that  there  would  be  a 
'jreat  number.  Some,  as  Lengerke,  apply 
it  to  all  the  Israelites  who  'were  not  writ- 
ten in  the  book'  (vcr.  1),  that  is,  to  a  res- 
urrection of  all  the  Israelites  who  had 
died :  some,  as  Porph.yry,  a  coming  forth 
of  tho  multitudes  out  of  the  caves  and 
fastnesses  who  had  been  driven  there  by 
persecution;  and  some,  as  Rosenmulloi 
and  Havernick,  understand  it  as  mean- 
ing all,  as  in  Rom.  v.  15,  17.  The  sum 
of  all  that  can  be  sxiid  in  reg.ird  to  the 


478 


DANIEL. 


LB.  C.  534 


the  dust  of  the  earth   shall  awake, !  to    ''  shame    and    everlasting    con 
Bome  to  everlasting  ^  life,  and  some  tempt. 


»  Matt.  25.  46. 


meaning  of  the  word,  it  seems  to  me,  is, 
that  it  is  so  far  ambiguous  that  it  might 
be  applied  (a)  to  '  maiii/,'  considered  as  a 
large  portion  of  a  number  of  persons  or 
things  ;  or  (b)  in  an  absolute  sense,  to  the 
whole  of  any  number  of  persons  or  things 
considered  as  a  multitude  or  great  num- 
ber. As  used  here  in  the  visions  of  the 
future,  .;  would  seem  to  denote  that  the 
eye  of  the  angel  was  fixed  on  a  great  mul- 
titude rising  from  the  dust  of  the  earth, 
without  any  particular  or  distinct  refer- 
ence to  tlie  question  whether  all  arose. 
There  would  be  a  vast  or  general  resur- 
rection from  the  dust;  so  much  so  that 
the  mind  would  be  interested  mainly  in 
the  contemplation  of  the  yreat  hosts  who 
would  thus  come  forth.  Thus  understood, 
the  language  might,  of  itself,  apply  either 
to  a  general  arousing  of  the  Hebrew  peo- 
ple in  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  or  to  a 
general  resurrection  of  the  dead  in  the  last 
day.  If  That  sleep.  This  expression  is 
one  that  denotes  either  natural  sleep,  or 
any  thing  that  resembles  sleep.  In  tho 
latter  sense  it  is  often  used  to  denote 
death,  and  especially  the  death  of  the  pi- 
ous— who  calmly  slumber  in  their  graves 
in  the  hope  of  awaking  in  the  morning  of 
the  resurrection.  See  Notes  on  1  Thess. 
iv.  14.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  it 
might  be  .-spplied  to  those  who,  for  any 
cause,  were  inactive,  or  whose  energies 
were  not  aroused— as  we  often  employ  the 
word  sleep  or  slumber — .and  th.at  it  might 
be  thus  used  of  those  who  seemed  to  slum- 
ber in  the  midst  of  the  persecutions  which 
raged,  and  the  wrongs  that  were  commit- 
ted by  Antioehus;  but  it  would  be  most 
natural  to  understand  it  of  those  who 
were  dead,  and  this  idea  would  be  par- 
ticularly suggested  in  the  connection  in 
which  it  stands  here.  ^  In  the  dust  of 
the  earth.  Heb.,  '  In  the  ground,  or  earth 
of  dust'— nfl.u"n;.:-ix.  The  language  de- 
notes the  ground  or  earth  considered  .is 
composed  of  dust,  and  would  naturally 
refer  to  those  who  are  dead  and  buried — 
considered  as  sleeping  there  with  the  hope 
of  awakingin  the  resurrection.  ^  Shall 
ivxd-e.  This  is  language  appropriate  to 
those  who  are  asleep,  and  to  the  de.ad  con- 
•idered  as  being  asleep.  It  might,  indeed, 
be  applied  to  an  arousing  from  a  state  of 


^  Is.  Ct.  24. 


lethargy  and  inaction,  but  its  most  obvi- 
I  ous,  and  its  full  meaning,  would  be  to 
apply  it  to  the  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
considered  as  an  awaking  to  life  of  thjse 
who  were  slumbering  in  their  gr.aves. 
*\\  Some.  One  portion  of  them.  The  re- 
lative number  is  not  designated,  but  it  is 
implied  that  there  would  be  two  classes. 
They  would  not  all  rise  to  the  same  des- 
I  tiny,  or  the  same  lot.  ^  To  everlasting 
life.  So  that  they  would  live  forever 
This  stands  in  contrast  with  their  'sleep- 
ing in  the  dust  of  the  earth,'  or  their  be- 
ing dead,  and  it  implies  that  that  state 
I  would  not  occur  in  regard  to  them  again. 
j  Once  they  slept  in  the  dust  of  the  earth; 
now  they  would  live  forever,  or  would  die 
;  no  more.  Whether  in  this  world  or  in 
'  another  is  not  here  said,  and  there  is 
i  nothing  in  the  passage  which  would  ena- 
ble one  to  determine  this.  The  single 
idea  is  that  of  living  forever,  or  never  dy- 
ing again.  This  is  language  which  must 
have  been  derived  from  the  doctrine  of 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  of  the 
j  future  state,  and  which  must  imply  tho 
I  belief  of  that  doctrine  in  whatever  sense 
it  may  be  used  here.  It  is  such  as  in 
]  subsequent  times  was  employed  by  the 
sacred  writers  to  denote  the  future  state, 
and  the  rewards  of  the  righteous.  The 
I  most  common  term  employed  in  the  New 
1  Testament,  perhaps,  to  describe  true  re- 
[  ligion,  is  life,  and  the  usual  phrase  to  de- 
note the  condition  of  the  righteous  after 
the  resurrection,  is  eternal  or  everlasting 
life.  Comp.  Matt.  xxv.  46.  This  lan- 
guage, then,  would  most  naturally  be  re- 
ferred to  that  state,  and  covers  all  the 
subsequent  revelations  respecting  the  con- 
dition of  the  blessed.  *f  And  some  to 
shame.  Another  portion  in  such  a  way 
that  they  shall  have  only  shame  or  dis- 
honour. The  Hebrew  word  means  re- 
j>roach,  scorn,  contumely ;  and  it  may  be 
applied  to  the  reproach  which  one  casts 
on  another.  Job  xvi.  10,  Ps.  sxxix.  9, 
Ixxi.x.  12  ;  or  to  the  reproach  which  rests 
on  any  one,  Isa.  liv.  4,  Josh.  v.  9.  Here 
the  word  means  the  reproach  or  dishon- 
our which  would  rest  on  them  for  their 
sins,  their  misconduct,  their  evil  deeds. 
The  word  itself  would  apply  to  any  per- 
sons  who  were  subjected  to  disgrace  foi 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER    XII, 


479 


3   And  they  that  be   ^wlse  shall 

*  or,  teachers.        b  Mat.  13.  43. 


their  former  misconduct.  If  it  be  under- 
etood  here  as  having  a  reference  to  those 
who  would  be  aroused  from  their  apathy, 
and  summoned  from  their  retreats  in  the 
times  of  the  Maccabees,  the  meaning  is, 
that  they  would  be  called  forth  to  public 
shame  on  account  of  their  apostacy,  and 
their  conformitj  to  heathen  customs;  if 
it  be  interpreted  as  applying  to  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead,  it  means  that  the 
wicked  would  rise  to  reproach  and  shame 
before  the  universe  foj  their  folly  and 
vileness.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  one  of  the 
bitterest  ingredients  in  the  doom  of  the 
wicked  will  bo  the  shame  and  confusion 
with  which  they  will  be  overwhelmed  in 
the  great  day  on  account  of  the  sins  and 
follies  of  their  course  in  this  world. — 
\\  And  everlmtimi  contempt.  Tho  word 
'  everlasting'  in  this  place  is  the  same 
which  in  the  former  part  of  the  verse  is 
applied  to  the  other  portion  that  would 
awake,  and  like  that  properly  denotes 
eternal;  as  in  Matt.  xxv.  40,  the  word 
translated  'everlasting'  [punishment]  is 
the  same  which  is  rendered  'eternal' 
[life],  and  means  that  which  is  to  endure 
forever.  So  the  Greek  here,  where  the 
same  word  occurs,  as  in  Matt.  xxv.  46 — 
'some  to  everlasting  life' — ti'j  ^ojijc  dioifior, 
'and  some  to  everlasting  contempt' — 
tis  aiaxvi'ni'  aidi/iov,  is  one  which  would 
denote  a  strict  and  proper  eternity.  The 
word  'contempt' — ^N'^'J — means,  pro- 
perly, a  repuhe ;  and  then  aversion,  ab- 
horrence. The  meaning  here  is  aversion 
or  abhorrence  : — the  feeling  with  which 
we  turn  away  from  that  which  is  loath- 
some, disgusting  or  hateful.  Then  it  de- 
notes the  state  of  mind  with  which  we 
contemplate  the  vile  and  the  abandoned; 
and  in  this  respect  expresses  the  emotion 
with  which  the  wicked  will  be  viewed  on 
the  final  trial.  The  word  everlasting  com- 
pletes the  image,  meaning  that  this  feel- 
ing of  loathing  and  abhorrence  would 
continue  forever.  In  a  subordinate  sense 
this  language  mif/ht  be  used  to  denote  the 
feelings  with  which  cowards,  ingrates, 
and  apostates  are  regarded  on  earth ;  but 
it  cannot  be  doubted  that  it  will  receive 
its  most  perfect  fulfilment  in  the  future 
world — in  that  aversion  with  which  the 
lost  will  be  viewed  by  all  holy  beings  in 
the  future  world. 


b  shine  as  the  brightness  of  the  fir- 
mament ;  and  they  that   turn  many 


3.  And  they  that  be  wise.  This  is  lan- 
guage which,  in  the  Scriptures  is  em- 
ployed to  denote  the  pious,  or  those  who 
serve  God  and  keep  his  commandments. 
See  the  Book  of  Proverbs,  passim.  True 
religion  is  wisdom,  and  sin  is  folly,  and 
they  who  live  for  God  and  for  heaven  are 
the  truly  wise.  The  meaning  is  that  they 
have  chosen  the  path  which  true  wisdom 
suggesW  as  that  in  which  man  should 
walk,  while  all  tho  ways  of  sin  are  ways 
of  foil}'.  The  language  here  used  is  ex- 
pressive of  a  general  truth,  applicable  in 
itself  to  all  the  righteous  at  all  times,  and 
nothing  can  be  inferred  from  the  term 
employed  as  to  what  was  designed  by 
the  angel.  ^  Shall  shine  as  the  brightness 
of  the  Jirmamcnt.  As  the  sky  abovo 
us.  The  image  is  that  of  the  sky  at 
night,  thick  set  with  bright  and  beautiful 
stars.  2\ro  comparison  could  be  more 
striking.  The  meaning  would  seem  to 
be,  that  each  one  of  the  righteous  will  be 
like  a  bright  and  beautiful  star,  and  that 
in  their  numbers,  and  order,  and  har- 
mony, they  would  resemble  the  heavenly 
constellations  at  night.  Nothing  can  be 
more  sublime  than  to  look  on  the  heavens 
in  a  clear  night,  and  to  think  of  the  num- 
ber and  the  order  of  the  stars  above  us  as 
an  emblem  of  the  righteous  in  the  heav- 
enly world.  The  word  rendered  firma- 
ment, means  properly  expanse,  or  that 
which  is  spread  out,  and  it  is  applied  to 
the  sky  as  it  appears  to  be  spread  out 
above  us.  ^  Ajid  they  that  turn  many  to 
righteousness.  Referring  to  those  who 
would  be  instrumental  in  converting  men 
to  the  worship  of  the  true  God,  and  to  the 
ways  of  religion.  This  is  very  general 
language,  and  might  bo  applied  to  any 
persons  who  have  been  the  means  of  bring- 
ing sinners  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth. 
It  would  apply  in  an  eminent  degree  to 
ministers  of  the  Gospel  who  were  suc- 
cessful in  their  work,  and  to  missionaries 
among  the  heathen.  From  the  mere 
language,  however,  nothing  certain  can 
be  argued  as  to  the  original  reference  as 
used  by  the  angel,  and  it  seems  to  have 
been  his  intention  to  employ  language  so 
general  that  it  might  be  applied  to  all, 
of  all  ages  and  countries,  who  would 
be  instrumental  in  turning  men  to  God. 
*^Aa  the  stars.    As   the   stars  that  are 


480 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  534 


tc  righteousness   as  the  stars  ^ for-]  the  words,  and  seal  the  book,  ereji  to 
ever  and  ever.  |  the  time  of  the  end  :  many  shall  run 

4  But  thou,  0  Daniel,  shut  '' up  to  and  fro,  and  knowledge  shall  be 
»1  Co.  15. 41,  42.         bKe.  10.  4.  increased. 


distinguished  by  their  size  nnd  lustre  in 
the  firmnment.  In  the  former  part  of 
the  verso,  when  speaking  of  those  who 
were  'wise,'  the  design  seems  to  be  to 
compare  them  to  the  sky  as  it  appears, 
set  over  with  innumerable  stars,  and  in 
their  numbers  and  groupings  constituting 
great  beauty ;  in  this  member  of  the  sen- 
tence the  design  seems  to  be  to  compare 
those  who  are  eminent  in  converting  men, 
to  the  particular  beautiful  and  bright 
stars  that  strike  us  as  we  look  on  the 
heavens — those  more  distinguished  in  size 
and  splendour,  and  that  seem  to  lead  on 
the  others.  The  meaning  is,  that  amidst 
the  hosts  of  'he  saved  they  will  be  con- 
spicuous, 07  they  will  be  honoured  in 
proporticn  to  their  toils,  their  sacrifices, 
and  their  success.  ^  Forever  and  ever. 
To  all  eternity.  This  refers  to  those  who 
shall  turn  many  to  righteousness;  and 
the  meaning  is,  that  they  shall  continue 
thus  to  be  distinguished  and  honoured  to 
all  eternity. 

4.  But  thou,  0  Daniel,  sliut  np  the 
u-orch.  To  wit,  by  sealing  them  up,  or 
by  closing  the  book,  and  writing  no  more 
in  it.  The  meaning  is,  that  all  has  been 
communicated  which  it  was  intended  to 
communicate.  The  angel  had  no  more  to 
say,  and  the  volume  might  be  sealed  up. 
•j  And  seal  the  hook.  This  would  seem  to 
have  been  not  an  unusual  custom  in 
closing  a  prophecj',  either  by  affi.\ing  a 
seal  to  it  that  should  be  designed  to  con- 
firm it  as  the  prophet's  work — as  we  seal 
a  deed,  a  will,  or  a  contract;  or  to  secure 
the  volume,  as  wo  seal  a  letter.  Comp. 
Kotes  on  ch.  viii.  20 ;  Isa.  viii.  16.  ^  Even 
to  rhe  time  of  the  end.  That  is,  the  period 
when  all  these  things  shall  be  accom- 
plished. Then  (a)  one  truth  of  the  pre- 
diction now  carefully  sealed  up  will  be 
seen  and  acknowledged;  (6)  and  then, 
also,  it  may  be  expected  that  there  will 
be  clearer  knowledge  on  all  these  subjects, 
for  the  facts  will  throw  increased  light  on 
the  meaning  and  the  bearing  of  the  pre- 
dictions. ^  3fani/  shall  run  to  and  fro. 
Shall  pass  up  and  down  in  the  world,  or 
shall  go  from  place  to  place.  The  refer- 
ence is  clearly  to  those  who  should  thus 
go  to  impart  knowledge;  to  give  informa- 


tion ;  to  call  the  attention  of  men  to  great 
and  important  matters.  The  langtuirje  is 
applicable  to  any  methods  of  imparting 
important  knowledge,  and  it  refers  to  a 
time  when  this  would  be  the  character- 
istic of  the  age.  There  is  nothing  else  to 
which  it  can  be  so  well  applied  as  to  the 
labours  of  Christian  missionaries,  and  min- 
isters of  the  Gospel,  and  others  who  in 
the  cause  of  Christian  truth  go  about  to 
rouse  the  attention  of  men  to  the  great 
subjects  of  religion;  and  the  natural  appli- 
cation of  the  language  is  to  refer  it  to  the 
times  when  the  gospel  would  be  preached 
to  the  world  at  large.  %  And  knowledr/e 
shall  be  increased.  To  wit,  by  this 
method.  The  angel  seems  to  mean  that 
in  this  way  there  would  be  an  advance  in 
knowledge  on  all  the  subjects  of  religion, 
and  particularly  on  the  points  to  which 
he  had  referred.  This  would  be  one  of 
the  characteristics  of  these  times,  and 
this  would  be  the  means  by  which  it 
would  be  accomplished.  Our  own  age 
has  furnished  a  good  illustration  of  the 
meaning  of  this  language,  and  it  will  ba 
still  more  fully  and  strikingly  illustrated 
as  the  time  approaches  when  the  know- 
ledge of  the  Lord  shall  fill  the  whole  world. 
Having  thus  gone  through  with  an  expo- 
.•:ition  of  these,  the  closing  words  of  the 
vision  (vs.  1 — 4),  it  seems  proper  that  we 
should  endeavour  to  ascertain  the  mean- 
ing of  the  angel  in  what  is  here  said,  and 
the  bearing  of  this  more  particularly  on 
what  he  had  said  before.  AVith  this 
view,  therefore,  several  remarks  may  be 
made  here.  (1)  It  seems  clear  that  there 
was  in  some  respects,  and  for  some  pur- 
pose, a  j)rimary  reference  to  Antiochus, 
and  to  the  fact  that  in  his  times  there 
would  be  a  great  rousing  up  of  the  friends 
of  God  and  of  religion,  as  if  from  their 
graves,  (a)  The  connection  demands  it. 
If  the  close  of  the  last  chapter  refers  to 
Antiochus,  then  it  could  not  bo  denied 
that  this  does  also,  for  it  is  introduced  in 
immediate  connection  with  that,  and  as 
referring  to  that  time :  *  And  at  that 
time.'  (6)  The  facts  referred  to  would 
require  the  same  interpretation.  Thus 
it  is  said  that  it  would  be  a  time  of  trou- 
ble, such  as  there  had  never  been  since 


D.  C.  534.J 


CHAPTER   XII. 


481 


the  nation  existed — a  state  of  things 
«vhich  clearly  refers  to  the  calamities 
which  would  be  brought  upon  them  by 
the  persecutions  of  Antiochus  Epiphancs. 
(c)  This  interpretation  seems  to  be  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  purpose  of  the  angel  to 
give  the  assurance  that  these  troubles 
would  como  to  an  end,  and  that  in  the 
time  of  the  greatest  calamity,  when  every- 
thing seemed  tending  to  ruin,  God  would 
interpose,  and  would  secure  the  people, 
and  would  cause  his  own  worship  to  be 
restored.  Porphyry,  then,  it  appears  to 
me,  was  so  far  right  as  to  apply  this  to 
the  times  of  Antiochus,  and  to  the  events 
that  occurred  under  the  Maccabees. 
'  Then,'  says  he,  '  those  who,  as  it  were, 
sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth,  and  are 
pressed  down  with  the  weight  of  evils, 
and  as  it  were,  hid  in  sepulchres  of  mis- 
ery, shall  rise  from  the  dust  of  the  earth 
to  unexpected  victory,  and  shall  raise 
their  heads  from  the  ground,  the  ob- 
servers of  the  law  rising  to  everlasting 
life,  and  the  violaters  of  it  to  eternal 
shame.'  He  also  refers  to  the  history,  in 
which  it  is  said  that,  in  the  times  of  the 
persecutions,  many  of  the  Jews  fled  to  the 
desert,  and  hid  themselves  in  caves  and 
caverns,  and  that  after  the  victories  of  the 
Maccabees  they  came  forth,  and  that  this 
was  metaphorically — ixeraipopixui — called 
a  resurrection  of  the  dead.  Jerome,  in 
loc.  According  to  this  interpretation,  the 
meaning  would  be,  that  there  would  be  a 
general  uprising  of  the  people  ;  a  general 
arousing  of  them  from  their  lethargy,  or 
EUmmoning  them  from  their  retreats  and 
hiding  places,  as  if  the  dead,  good  and 
bad,  should  arise  from  their  dust. 

(2)  This  latujuage,  however,  is  derived 
from  the  doctrine  of  the  literal  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead.  It  implies  the  belief  of 
that  doctrine.  It  is  such  language  as 
would  be  used  only  where  that  doctrine 
was  known  and  believed.  It  would 
eonvey  no  proper  idea  unless  it  were 
known  and  believed.  The  passage,  then, 
may  be  adduced  as  full  proof  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
both  of  the  just  and  the  unjust,  was  un- 
derstood and  believed  in  the  time  of  Dan- 
iel. No  one  can  reasonably  doubt  this. 
Such  langunge  is  not  used  in  countries 
where  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead  is  not  believed,  and  where  used, 
as  it  is  in  Christian  lands,  is  full  proof, 
even  when  employed  lor  illustration,  that 
the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  is  a  com-. 
41 


mon  article  of  belief.  Comp.  Notes  on 
Isa.  xxvi.  19.  This  language  is  not  found 
in  the  Greek  and  Latin  classic  writers ; 
nor  in  heathen  writings  in  modern  times  ; 
nor  is  it  found  in  the  earlier  Hebrew 
Scriptures  ;  nor  is  it  used  by  infidels  even 
for  illustration  ;  and  the  proof,  therefore, 
is  clear  that  as  employed  in  the  time  of 
Daniel  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead  was  known  and  believed.  If  so, 
it  marks  an  important  fact  in  the  pro- 
gress of  theological  opinion  and  know- 
ledge in  his  times.  How  it  came  to  be 
known,  is  not  intimated  here,  nor  ex- 
plained elsewhere,  but  of  the  fact  no  one 
can  have  any  reasonable  doubt.  Even 
now,  so  clear  and  accurate  is  the  lan- 
guage, if  we  wish  to  express  the  doctrine 
of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  that  we 
cannot  do  it  better  than  to  employ  the  lan- 
guage of  the  angel  in  addressing  Daniel. 

(3)  The  full  meaning  of  the  language  is 
not  met  by  the  events  that  occurred  in  the 
times  of  the  Maccabees.  As  figurative, 
or,  as  Porphyry  says,  metaphorical,  it 
might  be  used  to  describe  those  events. 
But  what  then  occurred,  would  not  come  up 
to  the  proper  and  complete  meaning  of  the 
prediction.  That  is,  if  nothing  viore  was 
intended,  we  should  feel  that  the  event 
fell  far  short  of  the  full  import  of  the 
language  ;  of  the  ideas  which  it  was  fitted 
to  convey  ;  and  of  the  hopes  which  it  was 
adapted  to  inspire.  If  that  was  all,  then 
this  lofty  language  would  net  have  been 
used.  There  was  nothing  in  the  facts  that 
adequately  corresponded  with  it.  In  the 
obvious  and  literal  sense,  there  was  no- 
thing which  could  be  called  a  resurrection 
to  '  cverlastiiKj  life;'  nothing  that  could 
be  called  an  awaking  to  '  everlasting 
shame  and  contempt.'  There  was  no- 
thing which  would  justify  literally  the 
language  '  they  shall  shine  as  the  bright- 
ness of  the  firmament,  and  as  the  stars 
forever  and  ever.'  The  language  natur- 
ally has  a  higher  signification  than  this, 
and  even  when  employed  for  illustration, 
that  higher  signification  should  be  recog- 
nized, and  would  be  suggested  to  the 
mind. 

(■t)  The  passage  looks  onward  to  a 
higher  and  more  important  event  than 
any  that  occurred  in  the  times  of  the 
Maccabees — to  the  general  resurrection 
of  the  dead,  of  the  just  and  the  unjust, 
and  to  the  final  glory  of  the  righteous 
The  order  of  thought  in  the  mind  of  the 
augel  would   seem   to   have    been   this  r 


482 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534. 


5  ^  Then  I   Daniel  looked,  and,  i  river,  and  the  other  on  that  side  of 
behold,  there  stood  other  two,  the  \  the  bank  of  the  river, 
one  on  this  side  of  the  ^bank  of  the  »?,>. 


he  design  0(1  primarily  to  furnish  to  Daniel 
an  at;sui:iin-c  that  deliverance  would  come 
in  thu  tiiu'j  uf  the  severe  troubles  which 
were  to  overwhelm  the  nation,  and  that 
the  nation  would  ultimately  be  safe.  In 
doing  this,  his  mind  almost  unconsciously 
glanced  forward  to  a  final  deliverance 
from  death  and  the  grave,  and  he  ex- 
pressed the  thought  which  he  designed 
to  convey  in  the  well  known  and  familiar 
language  used  to  describe  the  resurrec- 
tion. Commencing  the  description  in 
this  manner,  by  the  laws  of  prophetic 
suggestion  (comp.  Intro,  to  Isaiah,  g  7, 
III.),  the  mind  finally  rested  on  the 
ultimate  event,  and  that  which  lerjan 
with  the  deliverance  in  the  times  of  the 
Maccabees,  ended  in  the  full  contempla- 
tion of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
and  the  scenes  beyond  the  last  judg- 
ment. 

(5)  If  it  be  asked  what  would  be  the 
pertinenci/  or  the  jjroprieiy  of  this  lan- 
guage, if  this  be  the  correct  interpreta- 
tion, or  what  would  be  its  bearing  on  the 
design  of  the  angel,  it  may  be  replied  : 
(o)  that  the  assurance  was  in  this  way 
conveyed  that  these  troubles  under  An- 
tiochus  would  cease — an  assurance  as 
definite  and  distinct  as  though  all  that 
was  said  had  been  confined  to  that; 
(6)  that  a  much  more  important,  and 
more  cheering  general  truth  was  thus 
brought  to  view,  that  ultimately  the  peo- 
ple of  God  would  emerge  from  all  trou- 
ble, and  would  stand  before  God  in  glory 
— a  truth  of  great  value  then,  and  at  all 
times;  (c)that  this  truth  was  of  so  uni- 
versal a  nature  that  it  might  be  applied 
in  all  times  of  trouble — that  when  the 
church  was  assailed ;  when  the  people 
of  God  were  persecuted;  when  thej'  were 
driven  away  from  their  temples  of  wor- 
ship, and  when  the  rites  of  religion  were 
suspended ;  when  the  zeal  of  many  should 
grow  cold,  and  the  pious  should  be  dis- 
heartened, they  might  look  on  to  brighter 
times.  There  was  to  be  an  end  of  all 
these  troubles.  There  was  to  be  a  wind- 
ing up  of  these  affairs.  All  the  dead 
were  to  be  raised  from  their  graves,  the 
good  and  the  bad,  and  thus  the  righteous 
would  triumph,  and  would  shine  like  the 
brightness    of   the   firmament,   and   the 


wicked  would  be  overwhelmed  with  shame 
and  contempt. 

(0)  From  all  this  it  follows  that  this 
passage  may  be  used  to  prove  the  doc- 
trine of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and 
the  doctrine  of  eternal  retribution.  Not, 
indeed,  the  primary  thing  in  the  use  of 
the  language  as  applied  by  the  angel;  it 
is,  nevertheless,  based  on  the  truth  and 
the  belief  of  these  doctrines,  and  the 
mind  of  the  angel  ultimately  rested  on 
these  great  truths  as  adapted  to  awe  the 
wicked,  and  to  give  consolation  to  the 
people  of  God  in  times  of  trouble.  Thus 
Daniel  was  directed  to  some  of  the  most 
glorious  truths  that  would  be  established 
and  inculcated  by  the  coming  of  the  Mes- 
siah, and  long  before  he  appeared  had  a 
glimpse  of  the  great  doctrine  which  he 
came  to  teach  respecting  the  ultimate 
destiny  of  man. 

5.  Then  I  Daniel  loolced.  My  atten- 
tion was  attracted  in  a  new  direction. 
Hit'ierto,  it  would  seem,  it  had  been  fixed 
on  the  angel,  and  on  what  he  was  saying. 
The  angel  now  informed  him  that  he 
had  closed  his  communication,  and  Daniel 
was  now  attracted  by  a  new  heavenly  vi- 
sion. ^  And,  hchold,  there  stood  other 
two.  Two  other  angels.  The  connection 
requires  us  to  understand  this  of  angels, 
though  thsy  are  not  expressly  called  so. 
\  I'he  one  on  this  side  of  the  bank  of  the 
river,  Marg.,  as  in  Heb.,  lip.  The  word 
is  used  to  denote  the  bank  of  the  river 
from  its  resemblance  to  a  lip.  The  river 
referred  to  hero  is  the  Hiddekel  or  Ti- 
gris. Notes  on  ch.  x.  4.  These  angels 
stood  on  each  .side  of  the  river,  though 
it  does  not  appear  that  there  was  any 
special  significancy  in  that  fact.  It  per- 
haps contributed  merely  to  the  majesty 
and  solemnity  of  the  vision.  The  names 
of  these  angels  are  not  mentioned,  and 
their  appearing  is  merely  an  indication 
of  the  interest  which  they  take  in  the 
affairs  of  men,  and  in  the  divine  purposes 
and  doings.  They  come  here  as  if  they 
had  been  deeply  interested  listeners  to 
what  the  angel  had  been  saying,  and  for 
the  purpose  of  making  inquiry  as  to  the 
final  result  of  all  these  wonderful  flvents. 
The  angel  which  had  been  addressing 
Daniel,  stood  over  the  river,  ver,  6. 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER   XII, 


483 


6  And  o/ie  said  to  the  man  clothed  I  of  the  river,  when  he  ''held  up  hia 
in   linen,  which  wa.s  » upon  the  wa-|  right  hand  and  his  left  hand  unto 
ccrs  of  the  river,  How  long  shall  it  ' 
be  to  the  end  Df  these  wonders  ? 

7  And  I  heard  the  man  clothed 


in  linen,  which  toas  upon  the  waters 


6.  And  one  said.  One  of  these  angels. 
It  would  seem  that,  though  before  un- 
seen by  Daniel,  they  had  been  present, 
and  had  listened  with  deep  interest  to 
the  communication  respecting  the  future 
which  the  angel  had  made  to  him. 
Peeling  a  deep  concern  in  the  issue  of 
these  wonderful  events — thus  evincing 
the  interest  which  we  are  taught  to  be- 
lieve the  heavenly  beings  take  in  human 
affairs,  (see  Notes  on  1  Pet.  i.  12) — one 
of  them  now  addressed  him  who  had 
been  endowed  with  so  much  ability  to 
disclose  the  future,  as  to  the  termination 
of  these  events.  Such  an  inquiry  was 
natural,  and  accords  with  what  we  should 
suppose  an  angel  would  make  on  an  oc- 
casion like  this.  ^  To  the  man  clothed  in 
linen.  The  angel.  Notes  on  ch.  x.  5. 
^  Whicli,  was  npon  the- waters  of  the  river. 
Marg.,  from  above.  So  the  Hebrew. 
The  meaning  is,  the  man  seemed  to  stand 
over  the  river.  Comp.  ch.  viii.  16.  Len- 
gerke  supposes  that  by  this  was  intimated 
the  fact  that  the  divine  control  was  over 
the  waters,  as  well  as  over  the  land — in 
other  words,  over  the  whole  earth.  ^  JIoio 
long  shall  it  be  to  the  end  of  these  won- 
ders. Nothing  had  been  said  on  this 
point  that  could  determine  it.  The  an- 
gel had  detailed  a  succession  of  remark- 
able events  which  must,  from  the  nature  of 
the  case,  extend  far  into  future  years;  he 
had  repeatedly  spoken  of  an  end,  and 
had  declared  that  that  series  of  events 
would  terminate,  and  had  thus  given  the 
assurance  to  Daniel  that  these  troubles 
would  be  succeeded  by  brighter  and  hap- 
pier times,  but  he  had  said  nothing  by 
which  it  could  bo  determined  when  this 
would  be.  It  was  natural  to  start  this 
inquiry,  and  as  well  for  the  sake  of  Daniel 
as  himself,  the  angel  here  puts  the  ques- 
tion when  this  would  be. 

7.  And  I  heard  the  man,  &,c.  That  is, 
he  replied  to  the  question  at  once,  and  in 
a  most  solemn  manner,  as  if  he  were  com- 
municating a  great  and  momentous  truth 
respecting  the  future.     ^  When  he  held 

tp  his  right  hand  and  hia  left  hand  unto 


heaven,  and  sware  by  him  that  liveth 
forever  that  it  shall  be  for  a  time, 
times,  and  'a  half;  and  when   he 

'^  or,  from  above.      b  Re.  10.  5 — 7.     <^  or,  a  part. 

heaven.  Towards  heaven  :  as  if  appeal- 
ing to  heaven  for  the  sincerity  and  truth 
of  what  he  was  about  to  utter.  The  act 
of  swearing  or  taking  an  oath  was  often 
accompanied  with  the  lifting  up  the  hand 
to  heaven,  usually  the  right  hand  (comp. 
Gen.  xiv.  22;  Ex.  vi.  8;  Deut.  xxxii.40; 
Ezek.  XX.  5  ;  Rev.  x.  5),  but  here  the  angel 
stretched  both  hands  towards  heaven,  as 
if  he  were  about  to  make  the  affirmation 
in  the  most  solemn  manner  conceivable. 
^  And  sware  ht/ him  that  liveth  forever. 
By  the  eternal  God.  That  is,  he  appealed 
to  him  ;  he  made  the  solemn  asseveration 
in  his  presence;  he  called  him  to  witness 
to  the  truth  of  what  he  said.  The  occa- 
sion ;  the  manner ;  the  posture  of  the 
angel;  the  appeal  to  the  eternal  One, 
all  give  great  sublimity  to  this  transac- 
tion, and  all  imply  that  the  answer  was 
to  one  of  great  consequence  in  regard  to 
future  times.  ^  That  it  shall  be  for  a 
time,  times,  and  a  half.  Marg.,  or,  a 
■part.  The  word  (isn)  means  properly 
half,  the  half  ])art,  that  which  is  divided 
[yiP,'  to  divide),  s.  c.  in  the  middle.  The 
word  '  times'  means  two  times,  for  it  is 
dual  in  its  form,  and  the  expression 
means  three  times  or  jieriods  and  an  half. 
See  the  meaning  of  the  language  fully 
considered  and  explained  in  the  Notes 
on  ch.  vii.  24 — 28.  f  And  ichen  he  shall 
have  aecomplished.  When  he  shall  have 
finished  his  purpose  in  the  matter;  when 
he  shall  have  dono  all  that  he  could  do. 
^  To  scatter  the  2^ower.  All  that  consti- 
tuted the  power — their  armies,  means  of 
defence,  itc.  The  word  rendered  power — 
n; — means  properly  hand,  but  it  is  some- 
times used  to  denote  «  part  of  a  thing — 
as  a  portion  that  we  take  up  by  the  hand 
— a  handful;  that  is,  a  part  of  a  thing 
taken  up  at  once  in  dividing.  Gesenius, 
Lex.  See  Jer.  vi.  3;  2  Kings  xi.  7; 
Gen,  xlvii.  24.  In  accordance  with  this, 
Gesenius,  Lengerko,  and  Do  "Wette  sup- 
pose that  the  reference  here  is  to  the 
scattering  of  a,  portion  or  pa/'<  of  the  He- 
brew people  in  other  lands,  and  to  the 


484 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  534. 


iliall  have  accomplished  to  scatter  j  the  power  of  the  holy  people,  all 

these  things  shall  be  finished. 


hope  that  they  would  be  restored  again  | 
to  their  own  country  ;  and  that  the  mean-  j 
ing  of  the  angel  is,  that  when  these  dis- 
persions were  ended,  all  this  would  have 
been  accomplished.  The  word  has  also 
the  sense  oi poicer,  niiijht,  strenrjth,  (Ges. 
Lex.),  the  hand  being  regarded  as  the 
seat  of  strength,  Isa.  xxviii.  2  ;  Job  xxvii. 
11;  Ps.  Ixxvi.  0.  Thus  employed,  it 
may  denote  whatever  constituted  their 
strength,  and  then  the  idea  in  the  pas- 
sage before  us  is  that  all  this  would  bo 
scattered.  When  that  should  have  been 
done  ;  when  that  dispersion  should  have 
been  ended ;  when  these  scattered  forces 
and  people  should  be  again  restored,  then 
all  this  that  was  predicted  Avould  be  ac- 
complished, and  these  troubles  cease. 
This  would  bs  in  the  period  designated 
hjf  the  '  time,  and  times,  and  a  half.'  If 
it  refers  to  Antiochus,  it  means  that  the 
scattered  forces  and  people  of  the  He- 
brews vfould  be  rallied  under  the  Macca- 
bees, and  that  on  their  return  victory 
would  crown  their  eflforts,  and  the  land 
would  bo  again  at  peace.  If  it  has  a 
higher  and  an  ultimate  signification,  it 
would  seem  to  imply  that  when  the  scat- 
tered Hebrew  people  should  be  gathered 
into  the  Christian  church — when  their 
dispersions  and  their  wanderings  should 
come  to  an  end  by  their  returning  to  the 
Messiah,  and,  under  him,  to  the  true 
God,  then  the  series  of  predictions  will 
have  received  their  complete  fulfilment — 
for  then  religion  will  triumph  in  the 
world,  and  the  kingdom  of  God  be  set 
up  over  all  the  nations,  agreeably  to 
Rom.  xi.  15 — 25.  In  reference,  then,  to 
the  meaning  of  the  passage  as  used  by 
the  angel  here,  the  following  remarks 
may  be  made  :  (1)  It  had  an  applica- 
bility to  the  times  of  Antiochus,  and  to 
the  duration  of  the  calamities  that  would 
eomo  upon  the  Hebrew  people  under  his 
reign.  If  there  had  been  nothing  further 
intended  than  this,  the  more  language 
employed  would  have  found  a  literal  ful- 
filment in  these  events,  and  there  can  be 
no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  primary  re- 
Terence  of  the  angel  was  to  them.  See 
this  point  fully  considered  and  illustrated 
in  the  Notes  on  ch.  vii.  24 — 28.  Yet 
(2)  there  are  circumstances  which  lead 
us  to  suppose  that,  at  the  same  time,  and 
Vy  the  laws  of    prophetic  suggestionj. 


(See  Intro,  to  Isaiah,  §7,  III.),  more 
important  events  were  also  referred  to, 
and  were  designed  to  be  connected  with 
this  statement.  Those  circumstances 
are  (or)  the  manner  in  which  the  angel 
introduces  the  subject — by  a  solemn  ap- 
peal, with  outstretched  arms,  to  heaven. 
This  would  look  as  if  he  regarded  the  an- 
swer as  of  momentous  importance,  and  as 
if  he  were  contemplating  vast  movements 
in  the  future,  (b)  The  fact  that  the  lan- 
guage here  had  a  settled  meaning — refer- 
ring, as  used  elsewhere,  to  future  events 
deeply  afi"ecting  the  welfare  of  the  world. 
The  language  is  so  couched,  indeed,  that 
it  would  express  the  fact  in  regard  to  the 
duration  of  the  troubles  under  Antiochus, 
but  it  was  also  of  such  a  nature  that  in  its 
higher  signification  it  would  describe  the 
duration  of  more  momentous  transactions, 
and  would  designate  a  period  when  the 
true  religion  would  begin  its  universal 
reign ;  when  the  evils  of  a  vast  antichris- 
tian  power  would  come  to  an  end,  and 
when  the  kingdom  of  the  saints  would  bo 
set  up  in  the  world.  See  the  Notes  on 
ch.  vii.  24—28.  (4)  The  full  meaning  of 
the  language  would  then  seem  to  be,  that 
the  angel  designed  to  include  all  in  the 
future  to  which  those  words,  as  intended 
by  the  Divine  Spirit,  would  be  applicable. 
The  period  designated  by  the  phrase,  'a 
time,  and  times,  and  a  half,'  was  most 
momentous.  In  that  time  the  troubles 
introduced  by  Antiochus  would  end,  and 
a  state  of  peace  and  prosperity  would  suc- 
ceed ;  and  in  that  time,  also,  far  greater 
troubles  and  woes — those  connected  with 
a  most  fearful  apostacy  from  the  true  re- 
ligion, and  the  setting  up  of  a  kingdom 
of  oppression  and  wrong  over  the  people 
of  God,  of  which  the  oppressions  and 
wrongs  under  Antiochus  would  be  but  an 
emblem,  would  also  come  to  an  end,  and 
there  would  be  a  state  of  peace — a  reign 
of  righteousness — a  prevalence  of  religion 
— and  a  far-diffused  happiness  in  the 
world,  of  which  the  joy  at  the  dedication 
of  the  temple,  and  the  triumphs  over  An- 
tiochus, would  be  but  a  symbol.  The  ul- 
timate reference,  therefore,  I  suppose,  is 
to  the  downfall  of  that  great  antiehristian 
power,  the  papacy,  and  the  spread  and 
triumphs  of  the  true  religion  subsequent 
to  that,  and  consequent  on  that,  in  the 
wjrld.      These   were   events   that  justi- 


B.  C.  534.J 


CHAPTER  XII. 


485 


8  And  I  heard,  but  I  understood 
not :  then  said  I,  0  my  Lord,  what 
shall  he  the  end  of  these  things  ? 

9  And  he  said,  Go  thy  way,  Dan- 


fied  the  solemn  asseveration  of  the  angel, 
and  that  made  it  proper  for  him  in  refer- 
ring to  them  to  stretch  out  both  his  hands 
in  this  sublime  manner  to  heaven. 

8.  And  I  heard,  hut  I  understood  not. 
He  understood  not  the  full  significance  of 
the  language  employed — '  a  time,  and 
times,  and  a  half.'  This  would  make  it 
probable  that  there  was  something  more 
intended  than  merely  three  years  and  a 
half  as  the  period  of  the  continuation  of 
these  troubles.  Daniel  saw,  ajjparently 
from  the  manner  of  the  angel,  as  well  as 
from  the  terms  which  he  used,  that  there 
was  something  mystical  and  unusual  in 
those  terms,  and  he  says,  therefore,  that 
he  could  not  understand  their  full  import. 
^  Then  said  I,  0  my  Lord.  A  term  of 
civil  address.  The  language  is  such  as 
would  be  used  by  an  inferior  when  re- 
spectfully addressing  one  of  superior  rank. 
It  is  not  a  term  that  is  peculiarly  appro- 
priate to  God,  or  that  implies  a  divine 
nature,  but  is  here  given  to  the  angel  as 
an  appellation  of  respect,  or  as  denoting 
one  of  superior  rank.  •[  What  shall  be 
the  end  of  these  things  ?  Indicating  great 
anxiety  to  know  what  was  to  be  the  termi- 
nation of  these  wonders.  The  *  end'  had 
been  often  referred  to  in  the  communica- 
tion of  the  angel,  and  now  he  had  used 
ah  enigmatical  expression  as  referring  to 
it,  and  Daniel  asks,  with  great  emphasis, 
when  the  end  teas  to  be. 

9.  And  he  said,  Go  thy  way,  Daniel. — 
That  is,  make  no  further  inrjuiries.  All 
has  been  disclosed  that  is  to  be.  At  the 
close  of  his  communication  (ver.  4),  he 
had  told  Daniel  to  shut  up,  and  seal  the 
book,  for  his  revelations  were  ended.  He 
here  repeats  substantially  the  same  thing, 
and  he  assures  him  that  no  more  could 
be  imparted  on  the  subject.  1[  For  the 
words  are  closed  up  and  sealed  till  the  time 
of  the  end.  He  had  finished  his  commu- 
nication, and  had  directed  Daniel  to  close 
up  the  record  which  he  made  of  it,  and  to 
affix  a  seal  to  the  volume,  ver.  4.  He 
regarded  the  whole,  therefore,  as  closed 
and  sealed,  until  the  'end' should  come. 
The  events  themselves  would  unfold  the 
meaning  of  the  prediction  more  fully,  and 

41  * 


iel:  for  the  words  a>e  chased  up  and 
sealed  till  the  time  of  the  end. 

10  Many  shall   be   purified,  and 
made   white,   and   tried;    but   »the 
^Ee.  22.11. 


would  confirm  its  truth  by  their  exact 
correspondence  with  it.  Yet,  though  tho 
revelation  was  closed,  and  all  that  the  an- 
gel had  designed  to  say  had  been  said,  be 
does,  in  the  subsequent  verses,  throw  out 
some  suggestions  as  to  the  time,  or  as  to 
some  important  events  which  were  to 
mark  the  termination  of  the  wonders  re- 
ferred to.  They  are  bare  hints,  however, 
the  meaning  of  which  was  to  be  reserved 
till  the  time  when  the  predictions  would 
be  accomplished,  and  they  are  not  of 
such  a  natnre  that  they  can  be  supposed 
to  have  furnished  any  additional  light  to 
Daniel,  or  to  have  done  any  thing  to  re- 
lieve the  perplexity  of  his  mind  in  the  case. 
10.  JInuy  shall  be  jjurijied.  In  futuro 
times.  That  is,  as  the  connection  would 
seem  to  require,  there  will  bo  a  system 
introduced  by  which  many  will  become 
purified,  and  made  holy.  Daniel  might 
hope  and  expect  that  under  the  arrange- 
ments which  God  would  make,  many  of 
the  human  race  would  be  cleansed  from 
sin.  To  what  he  would  apply  this,  we 
cannot  determine,  but  it  is  a  great  truth 
of  immense  importance  in  regard  to  tho 
human  family,  that,  before  the  '  end,'  or 
the  consummation,  'many'  will  be  made 
holy.  ^  And  made  ichite.  White  is  tho 
emblem  of  innocence  or  puritj',  and  hence 
the  term  is  so  often  applied  to  the  righte- 
ous. '  They  have  washed  their  robes,  and 
made  them  tchite  in  the  blood  of  the 
Lamb,'  '  they  shall  walk  before  mo  in 
white,'  &c.  Hence  the  angels  are  repre- 
sented as  appearing  in  white  raiment. 
The  meaning  here  is,  that  many  on  the 
earth  would  be  made  holy  before  the  end 
I  would  come.  The  mind  of  Daniel  was 
I  thus  directed  onward  to  one  of  the  most 
'  glorious  truths  pertaining  to  future  times 
j  — that  multitudes  of  the  human  race 
would  be  redeemed,  and  would  bo  pre- 
pared for  a  holy  heaven.  *[  And  tried. 
I  Tried  as  in  a  furnace ;  that  is,  they  will 
be  subjected  to  persecutions,  and  to  va- 
rious other  forms  of  suffering,  that  will 
test  the  strength  of  their  faith,  and  the 
nature  of  their  religion.  This  language, 
also,  is  of  a  general  character,  and  would 
in  itself  apply  to  the  times  of  Antiochus, 


486 


DANIEL, 


[B.  C.  534 


wicked  shall  do  wickedly  :  and  none 
of  the  wicked  shall  understand ;  but 
the  wise  shall  understand. 


but  it  is  also  fitted  to  describe  what  would 
occur  in  other  ages.  Perhaps  the  mean- 
ing is,  that  it  would  be  a  prominent  thing 
in  the  future,  in  introducing  the  triumphs 
of  religion ;  and  in  preparing  the  people 
of  God  for  heaven,  that  they  would  be 
subjected  to  various  forms  of  trial.  There 
have  been  facts  enough  of  this  kind  in 
the  history  of  the  church  to  justify  this  de- 
scription, and  to  show  that  it  would  be  a 
marked  feature  in  spreading  religion  on 
the  earth,  that  its  friends  would  be  perse- 
cuted. ^  But  the  tcicked shall  do  icickedli/. 
They  will  continue  to  do  wickedly.  Not- 
withstanding all  the  judgments  that  will 
come  upon  men;  notwithstanding  all  that 
will  be  done  to  purify  the  people  of  God  ; 
and,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  '  many' 
will  be  of  a  different  character — will  be 
'purified,  and  made  white,  and  tried,' yet 
it  will  bo  a  truth  still,  that  there  will  be 
wicked  men  upon  the  earth,  and  that  they 
will  act  out  their  nature.  This  remark 
seems  to  have  been  thrown  in  by  the  an- 
gel to  prevent  the  impression  which  Dan- 
iel might  possibly  get  from  what  was 
said,  not  only  that  the  true  religion  would 
generally  prevail,  but  that  wickedness 
would  wholly  cease  in  the  earth.  Such  a 
time,  perhaps,  we  are  not  authorized  to 
look  for;  but,  while  we  may  hope  and 
believe  that  there  will  be  a  period  when 
the  worship  of  God  will  pervade  the  world, 
and  will  supercede  all  other  forms  of 
worship,  yet  we  have  no  reason  to  expect 
that  every  individual  of  the  human  family 
at  any  one  time  will  be  converted,  and 
that  none  of  the  remains  of  the  apostacy 
will  be  seen  on  the  earth.  There  will  be 
wicked  men  still,  and  they  will  act  out 
their  nature,  despite  all  that  is  done  to 
save  them,  and  despite  the  fact  that  reli- 
gion will  have  the  ascendency  in  the 
hearts  and  lives  of  the  great  mass  of 
mankind.  For  an  illustration  of  this  see 
Notes  on  Rev.  ix.  20,  21,  and  xx.  7. — 
^  And  none  of  the  wicked  shall  understand. 
This,  also,  is  a  general  declaration.  It 
means,  that  none  of  the  wicked  would  un- 
derstand the  import  of  these  prophecies, 
or  the  true  mature  of  religion.  Their  de- 
pravity of  heart  would  prevent  it;  their 
purpose  to  lead  a  wicked  life  would  so 
cloud  their  understandings,  and  pervert  I 


11  And  from   the   time  iliat  the 
daily  sacrijice  shall  be  taken  away, 


their  moral  judgments,  that  they  would 
have  no  correct  appreciation  of  the  gov- 
ernment of  God,  and  the  nature  of  the  di- 
vine plans  and  dispensations.  Conip. 
Notes  on  1  Cor.  ii.  14.  The  fact  here  as- 
serted has  been  always  true,  and  always 
will  be,  that  sin  prevents  a  clear  percep- 
tion of  divine  truth,  and  that  wicked  men 
have  no  appropriate  views  of  the  plans 
and  purposes  of  God.  To  comprehend 
religion  aright  a  man  needs  a  pure  heart; 
and  no  one  under  the  influence  of  de- 
praved feelings,  and  corrupt  propensities 
and  appetites,  can  expect  to  have  a  just 
appreciation  of  that  which  is  good. — 
Doubtless  it  will  be  found  to  be  true  in 
the  days  of  millenial  glory,  when  the  true 
religion  shall  spread  over  the  world,  and 
when  the  earth  shall  bo  filled  with  light, 
that  there  will  be  wicked  men  who  will 
have  no  correct  understanding  of  the  na- 
ture of  religion,  and  whose  minds  will  be 
blind  to  all  the  evidences  of  the  truth  of 
revelation  which  shall  be  diffused  around 
them.  No  man,  unless  he  is  converted, 
has  any  proper  conception  of  the  beauty 
of  religion.  *f^  But  the  wise  shall  under- 
stand. They  who  serve  God  and  love 
him,  and  who,  therefore,  come  under  the 
denomination  of  the  truly  loise.  Notes  on 
ver.  3.  The  meaning  is,  that  religion — 
the  love  of  God  and  a  pure  heart — will 
qualify  them  to  perceive  the  import  of 
divine  truth ;  to  appreciate  what  is  re- 
vealed, and  to  obtain  a  just  view  of  pass- 
ing events^or  to  'understand  the  signs 
of  the  times.'  Humble  and  sincere  piety 
— a  heart  and  mind  made  pure  and  clear 
by  the  influence  of  divine  truth — is  the 
best  preparation  for  understanding  the 
works  and  ways  of  God.  Comp.  Notes 
on  1  Cor.  ii.  9,  10,  11,  12,  14,  15. 

11.  And  from  the  time.  Though  the 
angel  had  said  (vs.  4,  9,)  that  his  com- 
munication was  closed,  and  that  he  im- 
parted all  that  he  was  commissioned  to 
communicate  to  Daniel,  yet,  as  it  would 
seem,  in  reply  to  the  earnest  request  of 
Daniel,  he  volunteers  an  additional  state- 
ment, in  regard  to  certain  important  pe- 
riods that  were  to  occur  in  the  future. 
The  language,  however,  is  very  obscure, 
and  it  would  appear  from  ver.  13,  that 
the  angel  scarcely  expected  that  Daniel 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER  XII, 


487 


and  » the  abomination  that  t  niaketh 

*  to  sd  up  the  abomination.       b  or,  astonisheth. 


would  understand  it.  The  statement  re- 
lates to  certain  periodn  that  would  suc- 
ceed the  time  when  the  daily  sacrifice 
would  be  taken  away.  Two  such  pe- 
riods are  mentioned  as  marking  import- 
ant epochs  in  the  future.  •[That  the 
daily  sacrifice  shall  he  taken  away.  This 
is  the  point  of  reckoning — the  terminus  a 
quo.  The  'taking  away  of  the  daily 
sacrifice'  refers,  undoubtedlj',  to  some 
act,  or  some  state  of  things,  by  which  it 
would  be  made  to  cease  ;  by  which  the 
daily  oflTerings  at  Jerusalem  would  be 
either  temporarily  suspended  or  totally 
abolished.  See  Notes  on  eh.  viii.  11,  ix. 
27,  xi.  31.  The  lantjuafje  here  is  applica- 
ble to  either  of  two  events  :- — to  tho  act 
of  Antiochus,  causing  the  daily  sacrifice 
to  cease  in  Jerusalem  (chs.  viii.  11.  xi. 
31),  or  to  the  final  closing  of  those  sacri- 
fices by  the  death  of  the  Messiah  as  the 
great  offering  to  whom  they  are  referred, 
and  the  destruction  of  the  temple  and  the 
altar  by  tho  Romans,  ch.  ix.  27.  The 
view  taken  in  the  interpretation  of  this 
passage  will  depend  on  the  question  to 
which  of  these  there  is  allusion  here  by 
the  angel,  or  whether  there  is  an  allusion 
to  hoth.  The  languafje  evidently  is  appli- 
cable to  both,  and  might  be  employed 
with  reference  to  either.  *\  And  the  abotn- 
ination  that  malccth  desolate  set  np.  See 
these  words  explained  in  the  Notes  on  ch. 
viii.  13,  ix.  27,  xi.  31.  The  same  remark 
may  be  made  here  which  was  made  re- 
specting tho  previous  expression — that 
the  lanr/uage  is  applicable  to  two  quite 
distinct  events,  and  events  which  were 
separated  by  a  long  interval  of  time  : — to 
the  act  of  Antioehus  in  setting  up  an  im- 
age of  Jupiter  in  the  temple,  and  to  a 
similar  act  on  the  part  of  the  Romans 
when  the  temple  was  finally  destroyed. 
The  view  which  is  taken  of  the  time  re- 
ferred to  here  will  depend  on  the  question 
which  of  these  is  to  be  regarded  as  the 
stand-point  or  the  terminus  a  quo,  or 
whether  the  language  is  designedly  so 
used  that  an  important  epoch  was  to  occur 
in  hoth  cases  within  a  specified  period 
vfttr  these  events.  On  these  points  there 
has  been  great  diversity  of  opinion. 
^  There  shall  be  a  thousand  tico  hundred 
and  ninety  days.  If  this  is  to  be  taken 
literally,  it  would  be  three  years  and  two 


desolate  set  up,  iJiere  sliall  he  a  thou- 
sand two  hundred  and  ninety  days. 

hundred  and  ten  days,  reckoning  tho 
year  at  360  days,  and  is  thirty  days  more 
than  the  three  years  and  a  half  referred 
to  in  ver.  7.  Prof.  Stuart,  who  supposes 
that  the  time  is  to  be  taken  literally,  and 
that  the  passage  refers  exclusively  to  An- 
tioehus Epiphanes,  explains  tho  applica- 
tion of  the  language  in  the  following 
manner: — "Antioehus  took  away  the 
daily  sacrifice  as  is  here  declared.  This 
was  in  the  latter  part  of  Maj',  B.  C.  168. 
Profane  history  does  not  indeed  give  us 
the  day,  but  it  designates  the  ye.ar  and 
the  season.  As  we  have  already  seen 
[compare  the  extract  copied  from  Prof. 
Stuart  on  ch.  vii.  24 — 28],  about  three 
and  a  half  years  elapsed,  after  the  temple 
worship  was  entirely  broken  up,  before 
Judas  Maccabeus  expurgated  the  temple 
and  restored  its  rites.  The  terminas  ad 
queni  is  not  mentioned  in  the  verse  now 
before  us  ;  but  still  it  is  plainly  implied. 
The  end  of  the  1290  days  must,  of  course, 
be  marked  by  some  signal  event,  just  ai 
the  commencement  of  them  is  so  marked. 
And  as  the  supjyressioji  of  the  temple-rites 
constitutes  the  definite  mark  of  the  com- 
mencement, so  it  would  seem  plain  that 
the  restoration  of  the  same  rites  must 
mark  the  conclusion  of  the  period  which 
is  designated.  The  '  time  of  tho  end,'  i.  e. 
the  period  at  the  close  of  which  the  per- 
secutions of  Antioehus  would  cease,  ia 
distinctly  adverted  to  in  vii.  25,  xi.  30 — 
35,  and  xii.  7.  The  nature  of  the  case,  in 
the  verse  before  us,  shows  that  the  same 
period  is  tacitly  referred  to  in  the  words 
of  the  speaker.  No  doubt  remains,  that 
his  march  [the  march  of  Antioehus]  from 
Antioch  to  Egypt,  for  hostile  purposes, 
was  in  the  spring  of  the  year  168  B.  C. 
lie  was  delayed  for  some  time  on  this 
march,  by  ambassadors  from  Egypt,  who 
met  him  in  Coelesyria.  Very  naturally, 
therefore,  we  may  conclude,  that  he  ar- 
rived opposite  Jerusalem  in  the  latter 
part  of  May,  and  that  there  and  then  he 
commissionedjApoUonius  to  rifle  and  pro- 
fane tho  temple.  The  exact  time  from 
the  period  when  this  was  done,  down  to 
the  time  of  the  expurgation,  seems  to  have 
been,  and  is  designated  as  being  1290 
days."  Hints  on  Prophecy,  pp.  94,  95. 
It  is  evident,  however,  that  there  is 
here  no  clear  making  out  of  the  exact 


488 


DANIEL. 


[Ji.  C.  5o4 


12  Blessed  is  he  that  Avaiteth,  and 
coraeth  to  the  thousand  three  hun- 
dred and  five  and  thirty  days. 

13  But  go  thou  thy  way  till  the 

time  by  any  historical  recorils,  though  it  is 
in  itself  not  improbable.  Still  the  great 
difScnlty  is,  that  in  the  supposition  that 
the  'time,  and  times,  and  a  half  refers 
to  Antiochus,  as  denoting  the  period  of 
his  persecutions,  thus  limiting  it  to  three 
years  and  a  half — a  period  vrhich  can  be 
made  out  without  material  difficulty 
(Comp.  Notes  on  ch.  vii.  24 — 28),  that 
another  time  or  period  should  be  men- 
tioned here  oi  tliirty  daj's  more,  concern- 
ing which  there  is  no  corresponding  event 
in  the  historical  facts,  or  at  least  none 
that  can  now  bo  demonstrated  to  have 
occurred.  See  the  remarks  at  the  closo 
of  the  next  verse. 

12.  Blessed  is  ho  that  u-aileth.  This 
indicates  a  patient  expectation  of  an 
event  that  was  to  occur,  and  the  happy 
state  of  him  who  would  reach  it.  The 
angel  refers  to  another  period  different 
from  the  'time,  and  times,  and  a  half,' 
and  different  also  from  the  twelve  hun- 
dred and  ninety  daj's.  lie  speaks  of  this 
as  the  consummation ;  as  the  desirable 
time,  and  pronounces  him  blessed  who 
shall  be  permitted  to  see  it.  The  idea 
here  is  that  of  one  looking  out  for  this  as 
a  happy  period,  and  that  ho  wovild  be  re- 
garded as  a  happy  man  who  should  live 
in  that  age.  \  And  cometh  to.  Literally 
'  touches.'  That  is,  whoso  life  would 
reach  to  that  time ;  or  who  would  not  be 
cut  off  before  that  period.  *[f  ^'''«  thou- 
sand three  hundred  and  five  and  thirty 
days.  The  article  is  not  used  in  the  ori- 
ginal, and  its  insertion  here  seems  to 
make  the  period  more  distinct  and  defi- 
nite than  it  is  necessarily  in  the  Hebrew. 
There  is  much  apparent  abruptness  in  all 
these  expressions,  and  what  the  angel 
says  in  these  closing  and  additional  com- 
munications has  much  the  appearance  of 
a  fragmentary  character — of  hints,  or  de- 
tached and  unexplained  thoughts  thrown 
out  on  which  he  was  not  disposed  to  en- 
large, and  which,  for  some  reason,  he  was 
not  inclined  to  explain.  In  respect  to 
this  period  of  1335  days,  it  seems  to 
btand  by  itself.  Nothing  is  said  of  the 
time  when  it  would  occur;  no  intimation 
is  given  of  its  commencement,  as  in  the 
former  cases — the  terminus  a  ouo  ;   and 


end  he :  ^  for  thou  shult  rest,  and 
stand  in  thy  lot  at  the  end  of  the 
day. 


a  or,  and. 


nothing  is  said  of  its  characteristics  fur- 
ther than  that  he  would  be  blessed  who 
should  bo  permitted  to  see  it — implying 
that  it  would  be,  on  some  accounts,  a  happy 
period. 

13.  But  go  thy  icay  till  the  end  be.  See 
vs.  4,  9.  Tho  meaning  is,  that  nothing 
more  would  he  communicated,  and  that 
he  must  wait  for  the  disclosures  of  future 
times.  When  that  should  occur  which  is 
here  called  '  the  end,'  he  would  understand 
this  more  fully  and  perfcctlj'.  The  lan- 
guage implies,  also,  that  he  would  bo 
present  at  the  development  which  is  here 
called  '  the  end,'  and  that  then  he  would 
comprehend  clearly  what  was  meant  by 
these  revelations.  This  is  such  language 
as  would  be  used  on  the  supposition  that 
the  reference  was  to  fur  distant  times,  and 
to  the  scenes  of  the  resurrection  and  tiie 
final  judgment,  when  Daniel  would  be 
present.  Comp.  Notes  on  vs.  2,  3.  \\  For 
thou  shah  rest.  Picst  now;  and,  perhaps, 
the  meaning  is,  shalt  enjoy  a  long  season 
of  repose  before  the  consummation  shall 
occur.  In  ver.  2  he  had  spoken  of  those 
who  '  sleej}  in  the  dust  of  the  earth,'  and 
tho  allusion  here  would  seem  to  be  tho 
same  as  applied  to  Daniel.  The  period 
referred  to  was  far  distant.  Important 
events  were  to  intervene.  Tho  aflairs  of 
the  world  were  to  move  on  for  ages  before 
tho  '  end'  should  come.  There  would  bo 
scenes  of  revolution,  commotion,  and  tu- 
mult— momentous  changes  before  that 
consummation  would  be  reached.  But 
during  that  long  interval  Daniel  would 
'rest.'  Ue  would  quietly  and  calmly 
'  slecj)  in  the  dust  of  the  earth' — in  the 
grave.  He  would  bo  agitated  by  none  of 
these  troubles  ;  disturbed  by  none  of  these 
changes — for  he  would  peacefully  slum- 
ber in  the  hope  of  being  awaked  in  the 
resurrection.  This  also  is  such  language 
as  would  be  employed  by  one  who  be- 
lieved in  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection, 
and  who  meant  to  say  that  he  with  whom 
he  was  conversing  would  roposo  in  the 
tomb,  while  the  aflairs  of  the  world  would 
move  on  in  the  long  period  that  would 
intervene  between  the  time  when  he  was 
then  speaking,  and  the  'end'  or  consum- 
mation of  all  things — the  final  resurrec 


B.  C.  534.J 


CHAPTER   XII. 


489 


tion.  I  do  not  see  that  it  13  possible  to  ex- 
plain the  language  on  any  other  supposi- 
tion than  this.  The  word  rendered  '  shalt 
rest' — nun — would  be  well  applied  to  the 
rest  in  the  grave.  So  it  is  used  in  Job  iii. 
13  :  "  Then  had  I  been  at  rest ;"  Job  iii. 
17  :  "  There  the  weary  be  at  rest."  ^  And 
$tand  in  thy  lot.  In  thy  place.  The  lan- 
guage is  derived  from  the  lot  or  portion 
which  falls  to  one — as  when  a  lot  is  cast, 
or  any  thing  is  determined  by  lot.  Comp. 
Judges  i.  3,  Isa.  Ivii.  G,  Ps.  cxxt.  3, 
xvi.  5.  Gesenius  {Lex.)  renders  this, 
"  and  arise  to  thy  lot  in  the  end  of  days  ; 
i.  e.  in  the  Messiah's  kingdom.  Comp. 
Rev.  XX.  6."  The  meaning  is,  that  he 
need  have  no  apprehension  for  himself  as 
to  the  future.  That  was  not  now,  indeed, 
disclosed  to  him,  and  the  subject  was  left 
in  designed  obscurity.  lie  would  'rest,' 
perhaps  a  long  time,  in  the  grave.  But 
in  the  far  distant  future  he  would  occupy 
his  appropriate  place  ;  ho  would  rbo  froui 
his  rest ;  he  would  appear  again  on  the 
stage  of  action ;  he  would  have  the  lot 
and  rank  which  properly  belonged  to  him. 
What  idea  this  would  convey  to  the  mind 
of  Daniel,  it  is  impossible  now  to  deter- 
mine— for  he  gives  no  statement  on  that 
point;  but  it  is  clear  that  it  is  such  lan- 
guage as  would  be  appropriately  used  by 
one  who  believed  in  the  doctrine  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  who  meant 
to  direct  the  mind  onward  to  those  far 
distant  and  glorious  scenes  when  the  dead 
would  all  arise,  and  when  each  one  of  the 
righteous  would  stand  up  in  his  appro- 
priate place,  or  lot.  ^  At  the  end  of  the 
days.  After  the  close  of  the  periods  re- 
ferred to — when  the  consummation  of  all 
things  should  take  place.  It  is  impossi- 
ble not  to  regard  this  as  applicable  to  a  res- 
urrection from  the  dead;  and  there  is 
every  reason  to  suppose  that  Daniel  would 
so  understand  it,  for  (a)  if  it  be  inter- 
preted as  referring  to  the  close  of  the  per- 
secutions of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  it  must 
be  so  understood.  This  prophecy  was 
uttered  about  oSi  years  B.  C.  The  death 
of  Antiochus  occurred  164  B.  C.  The  hi- 
terval  between  the  prophecy  and  that 
event  was,  therefore,  370  years.  It  is 
impossible  to  believe  that  it  was  meant  by 
the  aHgel  that  Daniel  would  continue  to 
live  during  all  that  time  so  that  he  should 
then  'stand  in  his  lot,'  not  having  died, 
or  that  ho  did  continue  to  live  during  all 
that  period,  and  that  at  the  end  of  it  he 


'stood  in  his  lot,'  or  occupied  the  post  of 
distinction  and  honour  which  is  referred 
to  in  this  language.  But  if  this  had  been 
the  meaning,  it  would  have  implied  that 
he  would,  at  that  time,  rise  from  the  dead. 
[h)  If  it  be  referred,  as  Gesenius  explains 
it,  to  the  times  of  the  Messiah,  the  same 
thing  would  follow — for  that  time  was 
still  more  remote;  and,  if  it  be  supposed 
that  Daniel  understood  it  as  relating  to 
those  times,  it  must  also  be  admitted  that 
he  believed  that  there  would  be  a  resur- 
rection, and  that  ho  would  then  appear 
i-n  his  proper  place,  (c)  There  is  only 
one  other  supposition,  and  that  directly 
involves  the  idea,  that  the  allusion  is  to 
the  general  resurrection,  as  referred  to  in 
ver.  3,  and  that  Daniel  would  have  part 
in  that.  This  is  admitted  by  Lengerke, 
by  Maurer,  and  even  by  Bertholdt,  to 
be  the  meaning — though  he  applies  it 
to  the  reign  of  the  Messiah.  No  other 
interpretation,  therefore,  can  bo  affixed 
to  this  than  that  it  implies  the  doctrine 
of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  that 
the  mind  of  Daniel  was  directed  onward 
to  that.  With  this  great  and  glorious 
doctrine,  the  book  appropriately  closes. 
The  hope  of  such  a  resurrection  was  fitted 
to  soothe  the  mind  of  Daniel  in  view  of 
all  the  troubles  which  he  then  experi- 
enced, and  of  all  the  darkness  which  rested 
on  the  future — for  what  we  most  want  in 
the  troubles  and  in  the  darkness  of  the 
present  life,  is  the  assurance  that,  after 
having  'rested'  in  the  grave — in  the  calm 
sleep  of  the  righteous — we  shall  '  awake' 
in  the  morning  of  the  resurrection,  and 
shall  '  stand  in  our  lot' — or  in  our  appro- 
priate place  as  the  acknowledged  children 
of  God,  '  at  the  end  of  daj's' — when  time 
shall  be  no  more,  and  when  the  consum- 
mation of  all  things  shall  have   arrived. 

In  reference  to  the  application  of  this 
prophecy,  the  following  general  remarks 
may  be  made : 

I.  One  class  of  interpreters  explain  it 
literally  as  applicable  to  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes. Of  this  class  is  Prof.  Stuart, 
who  supposes  that  its  reference  to  Anii- 
ochus  can  be  shown  in  the  following 
manner:  "The  place  which  this  passage 
occupies,  shows  that  the  terminus  a  quo, 
or  period  from  which  the  days  designated 
are  to  be  reckoned,  is  the  same  as  that  to 
which  reference  is  made  in  the  previous 
verse.  This,  as  we  have  already  seen,  is 
the  period  when  Antiochus,  by  his  mili- 
tary agent,  Apollonius,  took  possession 


I'JO 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534. 


of  Jcrusalcin,  and  put  a  stop  to  the  tern-  I 
nlo-worsliip  tliere.  The  author  of  the 
iirst  book  of  INIaccabees,  who  is  allowed  1 
liy  all  to  deserve  credit  as  a  historian, 
iiher  describing  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  | 
by  the  agent  of  Antiochus  (in  the  year , 
345  of  the  Seleucidre— 1G8  B.  C),  and' 
setting  before  the  reader  the  wide-spread 
devastation  which  ensued,  adds,  respect- 
ing the  invaders:  'They  shed  innocent 
blood  around  the  sanctuary  and  defiled 
the  holy  place  ;  and  the  inhabitants  of 
Jerusalem  fled  away  :  the  sanctuary 
thereof  was  made  desolate  ;  her  feasts 
were  turned  into  mourning,  her  sabbaths 
into  reproach,  and  her  honour  into  dis- 
grace ;'  1  Mae.  i.  37 — 39.  To  the  period 
wheu  this  state  of  things  commenced  we 
must  look,  then,  in  order  to  find  the  date 
from  which  the  1355  days  are  to  be  reck- 
oned. Supposing  now  that  Apollonius 
captured  Jerusalem  in  the  latter  part  of 
Jlay,  E.  C.  168,  the  1355  days  would  ex- 
pire about  the  middle  of  February  in  the 
year  B.  C.  104.  Did  any  event  take 
place  at  this  period,  which  would  natur- 
allj'  call  forth  the  congratulations  of  the 
prophet,  as  addressed  in  the  text  before 
us  to  the  Jewish  people  ? 

"  History  enables  us  to  answer  this 
question.  Late  in  the  year  165  B.  C,  or 
at  least  very  early  in  the  year  104  B.  C, 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  learning  that  there 
were  great  insurrections  and  disturbances 
in  Armenia  and  Persia,  hastened  thither 
with  a  portion  of  his  armies,  while  the 
other  portion  was  commissioned  against 
Palestine.  He  was  victorious  for  a  time  ; 
but  being  led  by  cupidity  to  seek  for  the 
treasures  that  were  laid  up  in  the  temple 
of  the  Persian  Diana  at  Elymais,  ho  un- 
dertook to  rifle  them.  The  inhabitants 
of  the  place,  however,  rose  en  masse  and 
drove  him  out  of  the  city;  after  which 
he  fled  to  Eobatana.  There  he  heard  of 
the  total  discomfiture  by  Judas  Macca- 
beus of  his  troops  in  Palestine,  which 
were  led  on  by  Kicanor  and  Timotheus. 
In  the  rage  occasioned  by  this  disappoint- 
ment, he  littered  the  most  horrid  blas- 
phemies against  the  God  of  the  Jews,  and 
threatened  to  make  Jerusalem  the  bury- 
ing-plaee  of  the  nation.  Immediately  he 
directed  his  course  toward  Judea ;  and 
designing  to  pass  through  Babylon,  he 
made  all  possible  haste  in  his  journey. 
In  the  meantime  he  had  a  fall  from  his 
chariot  which  injured  him;  and  soon 
after,  being  seized  with   a  mortal  sick- 


ness in  his  bowels  (probably  the  cholera) 
he  died  at  Taba?,  in  the  mountainous 
country,  near  the  confines  of  Babylonia 
and  Persia.  Report  stated,  even  in  an- 
cient times,  that  Antiochus  was  greatly 
distressed  on  his  death-bed  by  the  sacri- 
lege which  he  had  committed. 

"  Thus  perished  the  most  bitter  and 
bloody  enemy  which  ever  rose  up  against 
the  Jewish  nation  and  their  worship. 
By  following  the  series  of  events  it  is 
easy  to  see,  that  his  death  took  place 
sometime  in  February  of  the  year  104 
B.  C.  Assuming  that  the  commencement 
or  terminus  a  quo  of  the  1335  days  is  the 
same  as  that  of  the  1290  days,  it  is  plain 
that  they  terminate  at  the  period  when 
the  death  of  Antiochus  is  said  to  have 
taken  place.  'It  was  long  before  the 
commencement  of  the  spring,'  says  Froe- 
lich,  '  that  Antiochus  passed  the  Eu- 
phrates, and  made  his  attack  on  Elymais: 
so  that  no  more  probable  time  can  be 
fixed  upon  for  his  death  than  at  the  ex- 
piration of  the  1335  days  ;  i.  e.  some  time 
in  February  of  164  B.  C.'  No  wonder 
that  the  angel  pronounced  those  of  the 
pious  and  believing  Jews  to  be  blessed, 
who  lived  to  see  such  a  day  of  deliver- 
ance."    Hints  on  Prophecy,  pp.  95 — 97. 

There  are,  however,  serious  and  ob- 
vious difficulties  in  regard  to  this  view, 
and  to  the  supposition  that  this  is  all  that 
is  intended  here — objections  and  difficul- 
ties of  so  much  force  that  most  Christian 
interpreters  have  supposed  that  some- 
thing further  was  intended.  Among 
these  difficulties  and  objections  are  the 
following  : 

(«)  The  air  oi  mystery  which  is  thrown 
over  the  whole  matter  by  the  angel,  as  if 
he  were  reluctant  to  make  the  communi- 
cation ;  as  if  something  more  was  meant 
than  the  words  expressed ;  as  if  he 
shrank  from  disclosing  all  that  he  knew, 
or  that  might  be  said.  If  it  referred  to 
Antiochus  alone,  it  is  diflicult  to  see  why 
so  much  mystery  was  made  of  it,  and 
why  he  was  so  unwilling  to  allude  further 
to  the  subject— as  ?/ it  were  something 
that  did  not  pertain  to  the  matter  in 
hand. 

(h)  The  detached  axiA  fragmentary  chii- 
racter  of  what  is  here  said.  It  stands 
aside  from  the  main  communication.  It 
is  uttered  after  all  that  the  angtl  had  in- 
tended to  reveal  had  been  said.  It  ia 
brought  out  at  the  earnest  request  of 
Daniel,  and  then  only  in  hints,  and  ia 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER    XII, 


491 


eniginaticnl  language,  and  in  such  a  man- 
ner that  it  would  convoy  no  distinct  con- 
ception to  his  mind.  This  would  seem 
to  imply  that  it  referred  to  something 
else  tlian  the  main  point  that  had  been 
under  consideration. 

(c)  The  difleronce  of  time  specified 
now  by  the  angel.  This  relates  to  two 
points: 

1.  To  what  would  occur  after  the 
'closing  of  the  daily  sacrifice,  and  the 
setting  up  of  the  abomination  of  desola- 
tion.' The  angel  now  says  that  what  he 
here  refers  to  would  extend  to  a  period 
of  tsvclvo  hundred  and  ninety  days.  But 
in  the  accounts  before  given,  the  time 
specified  had  uniformly  been  *a  time, 
and  times,  and  half  a  time  ;'  that  is,  three 
years  and  a  half,  or  twelve  hundred  and 
sixty  days — difiering  from  this  by  thirty 
days.  Why  should  this  thirty  days  have 
been  added  here  if  it  referred  to  the  time 
when  tho  sanctuary  would  bo  cleansed, 
and  tho  temple-worship  restored?  Prof. 
Stuart  (Hints  on  Prophecj',  pp.  93,  1)4), 
supposes  that  it  vi'as  in  order  that  the 
exact  period  might  be  mentioned.  But 
this  is  liable  to  objections.  For  (a)  the 
period  of  three  and  a  half  years  was  suf- 
ficiently exact ;  (6)  there  was  no  danger 
«f  mistake  on  the  subject,  and  no  such 
error  had  been  made  as  to  require  cor- 
rection ;  (c)  this  was  not  of  sufficient 
importance  to  justify  the  manifest  anx- 
iety of  the  angel  in  tho  case,  or  to  fur- 
nish any  answer  to  the  inquiries  of 
Daniel,  since  so  small  an  item  of  infor- 
mation would  not  relieve  the  mind  of 
Daniel.  The  allusion,  then,  would  seem 
to  be  something  else  than  what  had  been 
referred  to  by  the  '  three  and  a  half 
years.' 

2.  But  there  is  a  greater  difiiculty  in 
regard  to  the  other  period — the  1335 
da3'S.  For  (a)  that  stands  wholly  de- 
tached from  what  had  been  said,  (h)  Tho 
heginninij  of  that  period — tho  terminus  a 
quo — is  not  specified.  It  is  true  that 
Prof.  Stuart  (Hints  on  Prophecy,  p.  95,) 
supposes  that  this  must  be  the  same  as 
that  mentioned  in  the  previous  verse,  but 
this  is  not  apparent  in  the  communica- 
tion. It  is  an  isolated  statement,  and 
would  seem  to  refer  to  some  momentous 
and  important  period  in  the  future  which 
would  be  characterized  as  a  glorious  or 
'  blessed'  period  in  the  world's  history, 
or  of  such  a  nature  that  ho  ought  to  re- 
gard  himself   as  peculiarly  happy  who 


should  bo  permitted  to  live  then.  Now 
it  is  true  that  with  much  probability  this 
may  be  shown,  as  Prof.  Stuart  has  done 
in  the  passage  quoted  above,  to  accord 
well  witli  the  time  when  Antiochus  died, 
and  that  tluit  was  an  important  event, 
and  would  be  so  regarded  by  those  pious 
Jews  who  would  be  permitted  to  live  to 
that  time  ;  but  it  is  true  also  that  tho 
main  thing  for  rejoicing  was  the  conquest 
of  Judas  Maccabeus  and  the  cleansing 
of  tho  sanctuary,  and  that  the  death  of 
Antiochus  does  not  seem  to  meet  the 
fullness  of  what  is  said  here.  If  that 
were  all,  it  is  not  easily  conceivable 
why  the  angel  should  have  made  so 
much  a  mystery  of  it,  or  why  he  should 
have  been  so  reluctant  to  impart  what 
he  knew.  Tho  whole  matter,  therefore, 
appears  to  have  a  higher  importance 
than  the  mere  death  of  Antiochus  and 
the  delivery  of  the  Jews  from  his  perse- 
cutions. 

II.  Another  class,  and  it  may  be  said 
that  Christian  interpreters  generally,  have 
supposed  that  there  was  here  a  reference 
to  some  higher  and  more  important  events 
in  the  far  distant  future.  But  it  is 
scarcely  needful  to  say,  that  the  opinions 
entertained  have  been  almost  as  numer- 
ous as  the  writers  on  tho  prophecies,  and 
that  the  judgment  of  the  world  has  not 
settled  down  on  any  one  particular 
method  of  the  application.  It  would  not 
be  profitable  to  state  the  opinions  which 
have  been  advanced ;  still  less  to  attempt 
to  refute  them — most  of  them  being  fan- 
ciful conjectures.  These  may  be  seen  de- 
tailed in  great  variety  in  Poole's  Synop- 
sis. It  is  not  commonly  pretended,  that 
these  opinions  are  based  on  any  exact  in- 
terpretation of  tho  words,  or  on  any  cer- 
tain mode  of  determining  their  correct- 
ness, and  those  who  hold  them  admit  that 
it  must  be  reserved  to  future  years — to 
theirfulfillment — to  understand  the  exact 
meaning  of  the  prophecy.  Thus  Pri- 
deaux,  who  supposes  that  this  passage 
refers  to  Antiochus,  frankly  says  :  "Many 
things  may  be  said  for  the  probable  solv- 
ing of  this  difficulty  [the  fact  that  the 
angel  here  refers  to  an  additional  thirty 
days  above  the  three  years  and  an  half, 
which  he  says  can  neither  be  applied  to 
Antiochus  nor  to  Antichrist],  but  I  shall 
otter  none  of  them.  Those  that  shall 
live  to  see  the  extirpation  of  Antiochus, 
which  will  be  at  the  end  of  those  years, 
will  best  be  able  to  unfold  these  matters. 


492 


DANIEL. 


[B.  0.  534. 


it  being  of  the  nature  of  these  prophecies 
not  thoroughly  to  be  understood  till  they 
are  thoroughly  fulfilled."  Vol.  iii.  2S3, 
2S4.  So  Bp.  Newton,  who  supposes  that 
the  setting  up  of  the  abomination  of  des- 
olation here  refers  to  the  Mohammedans 
invading  and  devastating  Christendom, 
and  that  the  religion  of  Mohammed  will 
prevail  in  the  east  for  the  space  of  1260 
years,  and  then  a  great  revolution — 
•'  perhaps  the  restoration  of  the  Jews, 
perhaps  the  destruction  of  Antichrist" — 
indicated  by  the  1290  years  will  occur; 
and  that  this  will  be  succeeded  by  an- 
other still  more  glorious  event — perhaps 
"  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles,  and  the 
beginning  of  the  millenium,  or  reign  of 
the  saints  on  the  earth" — indicated  by 
the  1335  years — says,  notwithstanding, 
"What  is  the  precise  time  of  their  begin- 
ning, and  consequently  of  their  ending, 
as  well  as  what  are  the  great  and  signal 
events  which  will  take  place  at  the  end 
of  each  period,  we  can  only  conjecture  ; 
time  alone  can  with  certainty  discover." 
Prophecies,  p.  321.  These  expressions 
indicate  the  common  feeling  of  those  who 
understand  these  statements  as  referring 
to  future  events  ;  and  the  reasonings  of 
those  who  have  attempted  to  make  a  more 
specific  application,  have  been  such  as  to 
demonGtrato  the  wisdom  of  this  modesty, 
and  to  make  us  wish  that  it  had  been  im- 
itated by  all.  At  all  events,  such  specu- 
lations on  this  subject  have  been  so  wild 
and  unfounded;  so  at  variance  with  all 
just  rules  of  interpretation,  so  much  the 
fruit  of  mere  fancy,  and  so  incapable  of 
solid  support  by  reasoning,  as  to  admon- 
ish us  that  no  more  conjectures  should  be 
added  to  the  number. 

III.  The  sum  of  all  that  it  seems  to  me 
can  be  said  on  the  matter  is  this  : — 

(1)  That  it  is  probable,  for  the  reasons 
above  stated,  that  the  angel  referred  to 
other  events  than  the  persecutions  and 
the  death  of  Antiochus,  for  if  that  was  all, 
the  .additional  information  which  he  gave 
by  the  specification  of  the  period  of  1260 
days,  and  1290  days,  and  1335  daj's,  was 
quite  too  meagre  to  be  worthy  of  a  formal 
and  solemn  revelation  from  God.  In 
other  words,  if  this  was  all,  there  was  no 
correspondence  between  the  importance 
of  the  events,  and  the  solemn  manner  in 
which  the  terras  of  the  communication 
were  made.  There  was  no  such  import- 
ance in  these  three  periods  as  to  make 
these  separate  disclosures  necessary.     If 


this  were  all,  the  statements  were  such 
indeed  as  might  be  made  by  a  weak  man 
attaching  importance  to  trifles,  but  not 
such  as  would  be  made  by  an  inspired 
angel  professing  to  communicate  great 
and  momentous  truths. 

(2)  Either  by  design,  or  because  tha 
language  which  he  would  employ  to  de- 
signate higher  events  happened  to  be  such 
as  would  note  those  periods  also,  the  an- 
gel employed  terms  which,  in  the  main, 
would  be  applicable  to  what  would  occur 
under  the  persecutions  of  Antiochus,  while 
at  the  same  time,  his  eye  was  on  more 
important  and  momentous  events  in  the 
far  distant  future.  Thus  the  three  years 
and  a  half,  would  apply  with  suffi- 
cient accuracy  to  the  time  between  the 
taking  away  the  daily  sacrifice,  and  the 
destruction  of  the  temple  by  Judas  Mac- 
cabeus, and  then,  also,  it  so  happens 
that  the  thirteen  hundred  and  thirty-Jive 
days  would  designate  with  sufiicient  ac- 
curacy the  death  of  Antiochus,  but  there 
is  nothing  in  the  history  to  which  the  pe- 
riod of  twelve  hundred  and  ninety  days 
could  with  particular  propriety  be  ap- 
plied, and  there  is  no  reason  in  the  his- 
tory why  reference  should  have  been 
made  to  that. 

(3)  The  Jingel  had  his  eye  on  three 
great  and  important  epochs  lying  appa- 
rently far  in  the  future,  and  constituting 
important  periods  in  the  history  of  the 
church  and  the  world.  These  were, 
respectively,  composed  of  1260,  1290, 
and  1335  prophetic  days,  that  is  years, 
Whether  they  had  the  same  beginning  or 
point  of  reckoning — termini  a  quo — and 
whether  they  would,  as  far  as  they  would 
respectively  extend,  cover  the  same  space 
of  time,  he  does  not  intimate  with  any 
certainty,  and,  of  course,  if  this  is  the 
correct  view  it  would  be  impossible  now 
to  determine,  and  the  development  is  to 
be  left  to  the  times  specified.  One  of 
them,  the  1260  years,  or  the  three  years 
and  an  half,  we  can  fix,  we  think,  by  ap- 
plying it  to  the  Papacj\  See  Notes  on 
ch.  vii.  24 — 28.  But  in  determining  even 
this,  it  was  necessary  to  wait  until  the 
time  and  course  of  events  should  disclose 
its  meaning;  and  in  reference  to  the  other 
two  pcrk'ds,  doubtless  still  future,  it  may 
be  necessary  now  to  wait  until  events  still 
to  occur,  shall  disclose  what  was  intended 
by  the  angel.  The  first  has  been  made 
clear  by  history ;  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  the  others  in  the  same  manner  will 


B.  C.  534.] 


CHAPTER    XII 


493 


be  made  equally  clear.  That  this  is  the 
true  interpretation,  and  that  this  is  the 
view  which  the  angel  desired  to  convey 
to  the  mind  of  Daniel,  seems  to  be  clear 
from  such  expressions  as  these  occurring 
in  the  prophecy  : — "  Seal  the  book,  to  the 
time  of  the  end,"  ver.  4  ;  "  many  shall  run 
to  and  fro,  and  knoioledge  shall  be  in- 
creased," ver.  4;  "the  words  are  closed 
up  and  sealed  till  the  time  of  the  end," 
ver.  9  :  "  many  shall  be  made  wise,"  ver. 
10;  "the  wise  shall  understand,"  ver.  10; 
"go  thou  thy  way  till  the  end  be,"  ver.  13. 
This  language  seems  to  imply  that  these 
things  could  not  then  be  understood,  but 
that  when  the  events  to  which  they  refer 
should  take  place  they  would  be  plain  to 
all. 

(4)  Two  of  those  events  or  periods — 
the  1390  days,  and  the  1335  days — seem 
to  lie  still  in  the  future,  and  the  full  un- 
derstanding of  the  prediction  is  to  be  re- 
•Jrved  for  developments  yet  to  be  made 
in  the  history  of  the  world.  Whether  it 
be  by  the  conversion  of  the  Jews  and  the 
iientiles,  respectively,  as  Bp.  Newton  sup- 
poses, it  would  be  vain  to  conjecture,  and 
time  must  determine.  That  such  periods 
— marked  and  important  periods — are  to 
occur  in  the  future,  or  in  some  era  now 
commenced  but  not  yet  completed,  I  am 
constrained  to  believe;  and  that  it  will 
be  possible,  in  time  to  come,  to  determine 
what  they  are,  seems  to  me  to  be  at  un- 
doubted. But  where  there  is  nothing  cer- 
tain to  be  the  basis  of  calculation,  it  is 
idle  to  add  other  conjectures  to  those  al- 
ready made,  and  it  is  wiser  to  leave  the 
matter,  as  much  of  the  predictions  respect- 
ing the  future  must  of  necessity  be  left 
Jo  time  and  to  events  to  make  them  clear. 
Let  me  add,  in  the  conclusion  of  the 
exposition  of  this  remarkable  book  : 

(a)  That  the  mind  of  Daniel  is  left  at 
the  close  of  all  the  divine  communica- 
tions to  him,  looking  into  the  far-distant 
future,  ver.  13.  His  attention  is  directed 
onward.  Fragments  of  great  truths  had 
been  thrown  out,  with  little  apparent  con- 
nection, by  the  angel ;  hints  of  momen- 
tous import  had  been  suggested  respecting 
great  doctrines  to  be  made  clearer  in  fu- 
ture ages.  A  time  was  to  occur,  perhaps 
in  the  far-distant  future,  when  the  dead 
were  to  be  raised  ;  when  all  that  slept  in 
the  dust  of  the  earth  should  awake;  when 
the  righteous  should  shine  as  the  bright- 
ness of  the  firmament ;  and  when  he  him- 
•elf  should  'stand  in  his  lot' — sharine' 
42 


the  joys  of  the  blessed,  and  occupying  the 
position  which  would  be  appropriate  to 
him.  With  this  cheering  prospect  the 
communications  of  the  angel  to  him  are 
closed.  Nothing  could  be  better  fitted  to 
comfort  his  heart  in  a  land  of  e.\ile ; 
nothing  better  fitted  to  elevate  his 
thoughts. 

(b)  In  the  same  manner  it  is  proper 
that  ice  should  look  onward.  All  the  rev- 
elations of  God  terminate  in  this  manner; 
all  are  designed  and  adapted  to  direct  the 
mind  to  far  distant  and  most  glorious 
scenes  in  the  future.  We  have  all  that 
Daniel  had ;  and  we  have  what  Daniel 
had  not — the  clear  revelation  of  the  Gos- 
pel. In  that  Gospel  are  stated  in  a  still 
more  clear  manner,  those  glorious  truths 
respecting  the  future  which  are  fitted  to 
cheer  us  in  time  of  trouble,  to  elevate  our 
minds  amidst  the  low  scenes  of  earth, 
and  to  comfort  and  sustain  us  on  the  bed 
of  death.  With  much  more  distinctness 
than  Daniel  saw  them,  we  are  permitted 
to  contemplate  the  truths  respecting  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead,  the  scenes  of 
the  final  judgment,  and  the  future  hap- 
piness of  the  righteous.  We  have  now 
knowledge  of  the  resurrection  of  the  Re- 
deemer, and,  through  him,  the  assurance 
that  all  his  people  will  bo  raised  up  to 
honour  and  glory — and  though,  in  refer- 
ence to  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and 
tho  future  glory  of  the  righteous,  there 
is  much  that  is  still  obscure,  yet  there  is 
all  that  is  necessary  to  inspire  us  with 
hope,  and  to  stimulate  us  to  endeavour  to 
obtain  the  crown  of  life. 

(c)  It  is  not  improper,  therefore,  to  close 
the  exposition  of  this  book  with  the  expres- 
sion of  a  wish  that  what  was  promised  to 
Daniel  may  occur  to  us  who  read  his 
words — that  *  we  may  stand  in  our  lot  at 
the  end  of  days;'  that  when  all  the  scenes 
of  earth  shall  have  passed  away  in  regard 
to  us,  and  tho  end  of  the  world  itself  shall 
have  come,  it  may  be  our  happy  portion 
to  occupy  a  place  among  the  redeemed, 
and  to  stand  accepted  before  God.  To 
ourselves,  if  we  are  truly  righteous 
through  our  Redeemer,  we  may  apply  the 
promise  made  to  Daniel ;  and  for  his 
readers  an  author  can  express  no  higher 
wish  than  that  this  lot  may  be  theirs.  If 
the  exposition  of  this  book  shall  be  so 
blessed  as  to  confirm  any  in  the  belief  of 
the  great  truths  of  revelation,  and  lead 
their  minds  to  a  more  confirmed  hope  in 
regard  to  these  future  glorious  scenes;  if 


494 


DANIEL. 


[B.  C.  534. 


by  dwelling  on  the  firm  piety,  the  con- 
summate wisdom,  and  the  steady  confi- 
dence in  God  evinced  by  this  remarkable 
man,  their  souls  shall  be  more  established 
in  the  pursuit  of  the  same  piety,  wisdom, 
and  confidence  in  God;  and  if  it  shall 
lead  the  minds  of  any  to  contemplate 
with  a  more  steady  and  enlightened  faith 
the  scenes  which  are  yet  to  occur  on  our 
earth,  when  the  saints  shall  reign,  or  in 
heaven,  when  all  the  children  of  God  shall 
be  gathered  there  from  all  lands,  the 
great  object  of  these  studies  will  have 
been  accomplished,  and  the  labour  which 
has  been  bestowed  upon  it  will  not  have 
been  in  vain.  To  these  high  and  holy 
purposes  I  now  consecrate  these  reflec- 
tions on  the  Book  of  Daniel,  with  an  ear- 
nest prayer  that  He  from  whom  all  bless- 
ings come  may  be  pleased  so  to  accept 


this  exposition  of  one  of  the  portions  of  hit 
revealed  truth,  as  to  make  it  the  means  of 
promoting  the  interests  of  truth  and  piety 
in  the  world ;  with  a  grateful  sense  of  hia 
goodness  in  allowing  me  to  complete  it, 
and  with  thankfulness  that  I  have  been 
permitted  for  so  many  hours,  in  the  pre- 
paration of  this  work,  to  contemplate  the 
lofty  integrity,  the  profound  wisdom, 
the  stern  and  unyielding  virtue,  and  the 
humble  piety  of  this  distinguished  saint 
and  eminent  statesman  of  ancient  times. 
He  is  under  a  good  influence,  and  he  is 
likely  to  have  his  own  piety  quickened, 
and  his  own  purposes  of  unflinching  in- 
tegrity and  faithfulness,  and  of  humble 
devotion  to  God  strengthened,  who  stu- 
dies the  writings  and  the  character  of  the 
prophet  Daniel. 


\"' 


t'- 


DATE  DUE 

•^f^^^^'^'^^ 

/ 

/ 

'^W^'^ISHi 

/                        «^ 

i2r*-"' 

\  y 

^ 

1/ 

I 

ir 

} 

>-*— — ^ 

jydl  li  -^ 

iiP^ 

fiWY    t 

HSBS^ 

^^.....jmara 

GAYLORD 

PRINTED  IN  U.S.A. 

H 


